national

Japanese whalers head to Antarctic

83 Comments
By Glenn Lockitch

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

© 2017 AFP

©2018 GPlusMedia Inc.

83 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Sea Shepherd won't be there this year. Hopefully, Japan will not be able to catch their 333 whales and prove there aren't enough whales to fill their greedy coffers and give up this money easting farce. Wouldn't that be something?

6 ( +21 / -15 )

Sea shepard never stopped the Japanese research whaling, their tiny ships could never stop them and their tactics were similar to terrorists. God bless Japan

-16 ( +15 / -31 )

Here's wishing them foul weather and sea-sickness all the way.

Sea shepard never stopped the Japanese research whaling

There never was any research whaling, only whaling. Hunting to fill the freezers. Everything else is eyewash.

The fisheries agency said it was taking measures to ensure the safety of its whalers

Best way to keep them safe is to keep them at home and give them decent jobs.

14 ( +28 / -14 )

The larger problem is that the high seas are almost entirely unregulated. The only thing stopping Japan from resuming commercial whaling is their voluntary membership of the IWC. They could start hunting whales to extinction tomorrow if they were to withdraw.

Even if Japan is correct that a resumption of commercial whaling is sustainable, is it right for a country in the northern hemisphere to travel halfway around the world to harvest resources in Antarctica? That has always been my problem with Japanese whaling (and the subsidies since I'm a taxpayer in Japan). We also see this same issue of international waters being a bit like the wild west when it comes to shark fining, but I think it will come to a head when deep sea mining takes off in the near future. The status quo is completely unsustainable.

8 ( +16 / -8 )

Why Canada, Australia, and New Zealand do not bring up the whole whaling issue in the TTP talks is still a mystery to me. There is so much regulation in the TTP, and yet something as significant as whaling not being brought up is just weird. I'll bet money that if Canada, Australia, and New Zealand threaten to walk away from the TPP unless whaling is stopped it would be stopped and pretty quickly

2 ( +14 / -12 )

yet something as significant as whaling not being brought up is just weird.

It depends on what you consider as significant. But I'd guess these countries stay out of it, because the whole thing is an emotional argument, not a logical one. And once you start baking emotional arguments into trade agreements, it just gets difficult.

8 ( +14 / -6 )

"Sending a group of five ships, headed by the 8,145-ton mother ship" is not a traditional source of food.

10 ( +17 / -7 )

There is one sure-fire way to ensure Japan continues whaling....and that is simply for the rest of the world to kick up a stink about it. The Japanese will not be dictated to by non-Japanese; it's as simple as that.

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

Whales are sentient beings. Being harpooned makes for a very bad day.

"Tradition" is no excuse for this barbarity. The Japanese people need to protest not only the subsidizing of this killing, but also the imposition of suffering on these intelligent creatures.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Good on them, whaling is now sustainable particularly of Minkes.

The Sea Shepherd is probably too busy in Norway where thousands a year are barbarically slaughtered rather than a puny 300.. It looks like they finally got their priorities right..

-9 ( +9 / -18 )

M3M3M3Today 07:48 am JST The larger problem is that the high seas are almost entirely unregulated. The only thing stopping Japan from resuming commercial whaling is their voluntary membership of the IWC. They could start hunting whales to extinction tomorrow if they were to withdraw.

Even if Japan is correct that a resumption of commercial whaling is sustainable, is it right for a country in the northern hemisphere to travel halfway around the world to harvest resources in Antarctica?\

You answered your own question in the beginning. International Waters are indeed unregulated in terms of economic development or the taking of marine resources. And sorry to have to put reality on some poster's lap but Whales are a Marine Resource. The IWC was created to Regulate the Whaling Industry. Nations of many countries send their fishing fleets literally all over the world. Whaling is no different. As for your comment about "hunting wales to extinction", that defies the purpose of the IWC Article 8 which authorizes Research Whaling for "the purpose of conserving Whale Stocks for the benefit of the whaling industry". In other words, The Japanese are the last to want to hunt whales to extinction since they want to prove that some species can be sustainably hunted and limited and regulated commercial whaling should be revived.

1 ( +11 / -10 )

It depends on what you consider as significant.

I think its significant since the countries in question have gone to the IWC to protest Japan.

But I'd guess these countries stay out of it, because the whole thing is an emotional argument, not a logical one.

We are going to have to agree to disagree here. What I see as illogical is Japan's position. On one hand, they talk about whaling as cultural thing. But on the other hand they talk about it as scientific research.

And once you start baking emotional arguments into trade agreements, it just gets difficult.

Of course. But that why all trade agreements are difficult as they all have emotional arguments baked into them.

I mean, this is going to go on for a long time. The west complaining and Japan continuing to whale. I just find it strange that Japan is still able to come to the table and discuss free trade without this issue being brought up. I actually thought that it would be mentioned during the TPP or during the EU Japan FTA talks.

0 ( +10 / -10 )

Even if Japan is correct that a resumption of commercial whaling is sustainable, is it right for a country in the northern hemisphere to travel halfway around the world to harvest resources in Antarctica? That has always been my problem with Japanese whaling (and the subsidies since I'm a taxpayer in Japan). We also see this same issue of international waters being a bit like the wild west when it comes to shark fining, but I think it will come to a head when deep sea mining takes off in the near future. The status quo is completely unsustainable.

Excellent point. I've often wondered about that as well, seeing how they are not Japanese waters..

0 ( +10 / -10 )

And Japan wonders why it continues to be a laughingstock...

3 ( +15 / -12 )

One wonders how many 'scientists' are on board to 'study the ecosystem of the Antarctic waters.'

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Once again, the issue on which Japan will claim it's science, until you point out all the reasons it is not, then will get angry and say it's cultural, at which you point out sending diesel ships to the Arctic and in some cases other nations' territorial waters is not an "ancient tradition" and htey get furious and say you're attacking them. What an embarrassment Japan can be sometimes, to itself.

7 ( +15 / -8 )

The number of people who benefit from whaling in Japan is so small that you have to wonder what they have done to get such special treatment. Whaling costs Japan a lot of money (subsidies for whaling and bribes to other countries for their votes) and lot of lost international prestige. At the same time, Japan offers buttons in compensation to victims of the Tohoku disaster and spends the lowest amount in the OECD on the country's children. There are hundreds of other industries that the Japanese government has allowed to collapse. It is baffling why this one gets money thrown at it.

4 ( +11 / -7 )

calculation methods for a sustainable catch limit

Last year, they killed 200 pregnant whales. PREGNANT whales.

If you don't let the next generation be born, it can't be sustainable. That's basic knowledge.

4 ( +13 / -9 )

Stop wasting my bloody taxes on this nonsense.

9 ( +18 / -9 )

Last year, they killed 200 pregnant whales. PREGNANT whales.

If you don't let the next generation be born, it can't be sustainable. That's basic knowledge

another good point.

3 ( +11 / -8 )

Tokyo says it is trying to prove the whale population is large enough to sustain a return to commercial hunting for a traditional source of food.

Interesting way of research. Killing 334 whales to show that there is no problem. I'd like to see that reasoning stand up in a PhD dissertation. Not!

1 ( +10 / -9 )

Aly RustomToday 08:50 am JSTEven if Japan is correct that a resumption of commercial whaling is sustainable, is it right for a country in the northern hemisphere to travel halfway around the world to harvest resources in Antarctica? That has always been my problem with Japanese whaling (and the subsidies since I'm a taxpayer in Japan). We also see this same issue of international waters being a bit like the wild west when it comes to shark fining, but I think it will come to a head when deep sea mining takes off in the near future. The status quo is completely unsustainable.

Excellent point. I've often wondered about that as well, seeing how they are not Japanese waters..

International waters belong to no country. Only territorial waters do. In addition, other countries can not take natural resources from another country's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Many nations commercially fish in international waters.

-1 ( +9 / -10 )

International waters belong to no country. Only territorial waters do. In addition, other countries can not take natural resources from another country's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Many nations commercially fish in international waters.

They are still regulated though. Have a look

http://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-2/fisheries/deep-sea-fishing/catching-fish-in-international-waters/

1 ( +8 / -7 )

AND there are UN regluations REGARDING Whaling TOO.

The United Nations has passed numerous other international water laws. The International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling addresses the issue of killing whales. Whales migrate over vast areas of the ocean. Overwhaling in the past 200 years brought many species of whales near extinction. The International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling prohibits whaling, except in limited circumstances.

http://watersome.blogspot.jp/2011/11/international-water-laws-and.html

-2 ( +8 / -10 )

But I'd guess these countries stay out of it, because the whole thing is an emotional argument, not a logical one.

Actually, your comment comes across as to me 'emotional' and I don't believe it is a logical viewpoint...

Please allow me to expand...

Japan claims they are researching for science, but that research is neither warranted nor requested by the international community. If it were, in fact, research - there would be no need to cull so many animals that consequently (and paradoxically) end up in school lunches and restaurants.

What is logical, is the fact that the U.N's very own International Court of Justice placed a temporary ban on Japanese whaling in 2014 as Japan could not, and cannot, justify what it does as something that is 'scientific'.

Japan has gotten off lightly so far, but they continue to embarrass themselves in the international community over what seems to be driven more by ego and stubbornness than logic.

So... sorry... but you don't get to highjack the word 'logical' when you are referring to Japan's very illogical and see-through dealings when it comes to this destruction of these habitats that are far from Japan.

3 ( +11 / -8 )

International waters belong to no country.

Exactly. As you correctly point out, the waters don't belong to Japan.

Usually people don't have to be told not to be greedy when there are 'communal' cookies on the table. But once in a while, someone will come along and stuff their face with them without thinking of others. These people look pretty silly and greedy to everyone else while doing so. They are secretly disliked.

It's a sad day when rules have to be posted about 'how to share cookies responsibly'... Even sadder when there are no cookies left to share anymore.

3 ( +10 / -7 )

Japan clearly doesn't like being told what to do, the more the complaints the more likely it is that they will just continue

For example,

told not to have an offensive capability - yet Japan now has the largest "defense" force in Asia and is currently considering to rename this to a "Military" force

told not to go whaling, yet continues to do so

told to acknowledge past war crimes. yet continues to cover them up.

and so on...

1 ( +7 / -6 )

AgentX- Excellent comment!

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

And Japan wonders why it continues to be a laughingstock...

For those who are anti-whaling and say that Japan is a disgrace to the rest of the World and an embarrassment, how many of your family members, friends or acquaintances back home actually care about or even know about this issue? Please answer with words, not votes.

-3 ( +9 / -12 )

One wonders how many 'scientists' are on board to 'study the ecosystem of the Antarctic waters.' just one and hes got a very large syringe with an explosive tip

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

Err my family in Australia and NZ are dumbfounded by this. I live in Japan and pay taxes that go to finance this Southern sea adventure that brings back meat that is stored again using my tax money. The disgrace is the wonton waist of tax dollars and the obsolete necessary of brutally killing a creature that's just swimming around, the cost of face saving to old men knows no bounds.

3 ( +12 / -9 )

Sea shepard never stopped the Japanese research whaling, their tiny ships could never stop them and their tactics were similar to terrorists. God bless Japan

Ha, ha, good one! Who says Japanese don’t get sarcasm?

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

@Dadude, make no mistake. More than enough people around the world are watching and care deeply about this issue.

... the cost of face saving to old men knows no bounds.

This is pretty much what's at the core of it.

0 ( +9 / -9 )

If you don't want your tax money to be used for this, go home.  Then everybody is happy.

-4 ( +9 / -13 )

It's interesting that the pro-whaling crowd claim the anti-whaling crowd base their arguments on emotion. How about we look at the facts, hey?

Japan wastes 5 billion yen of tax payer's money for whaling 'research' every year. One year they even used Tohoku rebuilding funds as well.

Japan has a dwindling market for whale meat. So much so that they intend to give it away to schools and make kids eat it.

Japan's 'cultural tradition' of whaling argument is false. Yes, it's true many generations have used 'coastal' whaling as a source of food. However, commercial whaling started in the post-war years and was set up by the US as a source of protein for the starving country. Japan is no longer a starving country.

The Ross Sea and the other southern oceans have been deemed whale sanctuaries by over 30 countries, which Japan 'chooses' to ignore.

Whale meat is often substituted for dolphin meat in supermarkets, which contains extremely high amounts of mercury and have been deemed unfit for human consumption by the WHO. The dolphin meat is substituted because they can't sell it either. The finer cuts of whale meat are sold for ridiculous prices in Japanese restaurants to a select few who actually want to eat it.

Japan buys whale meat from Iceland and Norway to gain support for their whaling activities, even though they cannot sell it. Samples of the whale meat from these countries have been proven to be from protected Blue whales and the still endangered northern right whale.

Japan's research whaling was deemed to be a farce by the international court. They then turned around and changed their 'research' killing by stating a few facts about whale populations and DNA, most of this data can be obtained through non-lethal research. Of course, the stomach contents do require lethal research. However, they do not require data from several hundred dead whales. Conclusive data on stomach contents can be obtained from a few dead whales. Furthermore, this data only needs to be obtained once a decade, not every year. Populations can be estimated by airplane. DNA samples can be taken by a small hollow tipped arrow. There is nothing in Japan's 'research' that justifies killing over 300 whales every year.

So, all you pro-whalers using the 'emotion' card are wrong. Japan does not need to kill 333 whales every year for their research. They are killing them for their greed. Plain and simple!

2 ( +5 / -3 )

People (no matter where they live) should have the right to criticise elements of the country they are in. It doesn't mean you hate your host country, or even your home country.

Being told to "go home" shuts down debate. You might as well close down your social media accounts, stop having opinions and shut yourself in isolation.

Japan has a lot to teach us. It is an inspirational country with a rich history.

I count myself lucky to be here. But I am not going to shy away from issues I feel strongly about.

None of us should.

9 ( +14 / -5 )

It's interesting that the pro-whaling crowd claim the anti-whaling crowd base their arguments on emotion. How about we look at the facts, hey?

i don't think anyone here is "pro-whaling" per se. i think most of us don't think this is a huge issue that warrants so much attention. it seems like aussies and kiwis are the most bothered by this (and a few americans). i can guarantee you that an overhwelming majority of countries and people around the world couldn't give a rat's behind about japan whaling in the antartic. so we aren't pro-whaling. we just don't understand what the huge stink about it is. and quite a few of us don't like westerners preaching to japanese people. like your way of thinking is somehow superior to japanese people's way of thinking. it all feels so culturally superior.

3 ( +11 / -8 )

@OssanAmerica

International waters belong to no country. Only territorial waters do. In addition, other countries can not take natural resources from another country's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

This is entirely correct, but it would be incorrect to say that these resources belong to no-one or to the first person who can extract them. International waters are deemed to be 'the common heritage of mankind', meaning they belong to everyone, not just the countries with the biggest fishing fleets and an insatiable appetite for seafood. Whether this gives countries the right to restrain other countries from exploiting resources on the basis that they are taking more than their fair share, risking environmental damage, or abusing their rights in some other way has never been conclusively decided. Again, I think a complete overhaul of international law is going to be back on the agenda the minute someone starts scraping gold off the seabed. Global regulation and revenue sharing was discussed back in the 80s but nothing was ever agreed since the technology seemed like it was centuries away.

It's also worth mentioning that Japan enters what is, or woud be, Australia's EEZ to catch some of these whales. They get away with this because Australia is not allowed to assert what might be a new territorial claim under the Antarctic treaty. It's a pretty sleazy and undignified bit of legal loopholery on Japan's part.

@Aly

I agree. Good posts and thanks for the interesting links.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

If you don't want your tax money to be used for this, go home.  Then everybody is happy.

How about the Japanese people who don’t want their bloody taxes wasted on this nonsense? Where should they go?

Japanese people who don’t want taxes wasted on this do exist by the way. I’ve met them.

2 ( +10 / -8 )

It's interesting that the pro-whaling crowd claim the anti-whaling crowd base their arguments on emotion.

If you're referring to me, I'm not pro-whaling. I think Japan would be better off stopping whaling, as the benefits (eating whale meat) don't seem to be worth the troubles.

How about we look at the facts, hey?

You listed a bunch of facts, but none of them showed the anti-whaler's argument to not be an emotional one.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

Time again for more "tasty" [tastless] research.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

But I am not going to shy away from issues I feel strongly about.

None of us should.

So is it OK Japanese also not  going to shy away from issues they feel strongly about in Japan? Thank you.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

If the emotional anti-whaler were truly concerned about the welfare of whales, they would look to rein in Norway's barbaric program where thousands are massacred and is by far the most egregious offender. But naturally they will emotionally go for the easier target in Japan as they don't actually care about whales when it comes down to it and care more about themselves and snide attacks at the country.

One thing they could do is leave Japan, which would starve the government of their tax revenues that fund this whaling program, but naturally not a single one ever will, hilariously extending the life of the whaling programs even more. And don't even think about missing a tax payment

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Disillusioned - you have won the internet today! Best comment. Can't like it enough.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

it seems like aussies and kiwis are the most bothered by this (and a few americans)

That's mainly because Japan is doing it, essentially, in Aust/NZ's back yard!

Both Aust and NZ had a tradition of whaliing, too. When it was clear that whale numbers were nearing extinction - out of decency - whaling was brought to a stop.

Nowadays, whales are celebrated and protected as they bring tourism, biodiversity and other good things. Humans have only recently bothered to really get to know whales and found that they are a sentient species that deserve far more credit than they were given in the past. Maybe some day Japan will catch up.

Until then, there is simply no way the pro-whaling community can justify this barbarity. They can only resort to straw-man fallacies and other deflections...

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

What a waste of dead animals and taxpayer money.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

"If you don't want your tax money to be used for this, go home.  Then everybody is happy"

Thats pretty funny coming from tina who continually whines about various things American , yet does not " go home" to Okinawa ( which btw is an awesome place.)

Anyway as many said on countless occasions , people comment because they care about what the country they live in is doing . Better than the ones who dont give crap about anything.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

prove there aren't enough whales to fill their greedy coffers

So you are hoping that the whales ARE going extinct just to spite the whalers?

Why Canada

Well, Canada quit the IWC years ago and issues their own permits for whaling. So they really aren't in a position to complain.

yet something as significant as whaling not being brought up is just weird...I think its significant since the countries in question have gone to the IWC to protest Japan.

That is because most people and most countries don't consider it significant. And the countries 'protests' are political to keep their local activists happy.

If you don't let the next generation be born, it can't be sustainable. That's basic knowledge.

And yet despite doing so for over 3 decades the population is stable. So it must be sustainable. That's basic knowledge.

They are still regulated though. Have a look

And Japan is following the regulations.

AND there are UN regluations REGARDING Whaling TOO.

HAVE you READ the ICRW? Try Article VIII. And also note that the ICRW is VOLUNTARY.

nor requested by the international community

So only research requested by 'the international community' is allowed? Where does this belief come from?

when there are 'communal' cookies on the table

But when no one else in the community wants to eat the cookies then they really don't have a reason to complain.

but it would be incorrect to say that these resources belong to no-one or to the first person who can extract them.

Actually that is exactly what it means.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Here's a question for you: if this is meant to be scientific whaling... why is there a factory ship?

Anyway, hope the weather is awful and a sea monster rises from the depths to wreak havoc... one can dream...

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

Oh and whales aren't a 'resource'... they are highly intelligent wild animals

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

'will conduct the hunt until March to study whale behavior and biology' ...Studying behaviour of dead whales?

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

Japan never provided any research results, Japanese people blindly believe there is some research (just like anything else government tells them).

The most disgusting thing is that I watched documentary where they asked a guy why he does whaling and the answer was "It is tradition and it makes me feel so powerful to kill such huge animal." -There is no need to say something is wrong with your tradition, but anyway, the justice always come to all and everything so it will for Japan.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

If you don't want your tax money to be used for this, go home.  Then everybody is happy. like Japan can afford to lose any potential tax payers. what Japan need is fewer old timers with recalcitrant pride wasting money on things that have zero actual befit to J society, oh and racist right wing nutters stating anti gaijin garbage they really know FA about.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

If the emotional anti-whaler were truly concerned about the welfare of whales, they would look to rein in Norway's barbaric program where thousands are massacred and is by far the most egregious offender. But naturally they will emotionally go for the easier target in Japan as they don't actually care about whales when it comes down to it and care more about themselves and snide attacks at the country.

I am vehemently opposed to the Scandanavians killing whales and dolphins as much as I against Japan doing the same thing... but as this is a Japanese news site, most of us who are opposed to the slaughter of such magnificent creatures direct our ire at Japan.

I think most of us don't think this is a huge issue that warrants so much attention. it seems like aussies and kiwis are the most bothered by this (and a few americans).

And British... we are also anti-whaling... like most whaling countries we abandoned the practice and now treat them with respect. When a dead whale appears on a beach it's on the TV news, live stranded whales are treated to live updates and people will try to get them back out to sea. We don't want them to die. So not just Aussies, New Zealanders and a few yanks...

Maybe Japan should try whale watching and sea how people's attitudes could change... rather than rejoicing in seeing whales with blood spurting from harpoon strikes, or seeing dolphins being clubbed and stabbed to death in a cove... they may come to have more empathy for cetaceans, a greater understanding.

Just a thought :)

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Aly RustomToday 10:36 am JSTInternational waters belong to no country. Only territorial waters do. In addition, other countries can not take natural resources from another country's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Many nations commercially fish in international waters.

They are still regulated though. Have a look

http://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-2/fisheries/deep-sea-fishing/catching-fish-in-international-waters/

From your link:

"China and Japan also fish in the northeast Atlantic. This is consistent with international maritime law and completely legitimate according to the principle of freedom of access to the high seas. "

"The Arctic, on the other hand, is not yet managed by RFMOs because fishing there is rare"

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Aly RustomToday 10:38 am JSTAND there are UN regluations REGARDING Whaling TOO.

The United Nations has passed numerous other international water laws. The International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling addresses the issue of killing whales. Whales migrate over vast areas of the ocean. Overwhaling in the past 200 years brought many species of whales near extinction. The International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling prohibits whaling, except in limited circumstances.

http://watersome.blogspot.jp/2011/11/international-water-laws-and.html

I don't even have to read your link to answer this one. Those "LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES" include Scientific Research Whaling under IWC Article 8 which also exempts recognition of "sanctuaries".

3 ( +7 / -4 )

M3M3M3Today 02:59 pm JST@OssanAmerica

International waters belong to no country. Only territorial waters do. In addition, other countries can not take natural resources from another country's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

This is entirely correct, but it would be incorrect to say that these resources belong to no-one or to the first person who can extract them. International waters are deemed to be 'the common heritage of mankind', meaning they belong to everyone, not just the countries with the biggest fishing fleets and an insatiable appetite for seafood. Whether this gives countries the right to restrain other countries from exploiting resources on the basis that they are taking more than their fair share, risking environmental damage, or abusing their rights in some other way has never been conclusively decided. Again, I think a complete overhaul of international law is going to be back on the agenda the minute someone starts scraping gold off the seabed. Global regulation and revenue sharing was discussed back in the 80s but nothing was ever agreed since the technology seemed like it was centuries away.

Really not worth discussing your (and other people's) view of "how" the world SHOULD be. But take into account China's present effort to take control of the entire South China Sea and you may realize that what you suggest, while perhaps right in principle, is far from easy to implement in reality.

It's also worth mentioning that Japan enters what is, or woud be, Australia's EEZ to catch some of these whales. They get away with this because Australia is not allowed to assert what might be a new territorial claim under the Antarctic treaty. It's a pretty sleazy and undignified bit of legal loopholery on Japan's part.

If the Japanese Research Whaling fleet enters and carries out whaling in Australia's EEZ then they are in clear violation and without doubt would be challenged by the appropriate Australian law enforcement authorities. That they do not is it absolute evidence that it is simply not Australian EEZ. That Australia has treaty obligations which keep it from asserting a claim is irrelevant to the issue. Nothing sleazy about complying with the law. Other signatories to the Antarctic Treaty may find Australia's attempt to assert a claim in violation of the treaty terms to be "sleazy".

@Aly

I agree. Good posts and thanks for the interesting links.

But both link points proven pointless to the issue.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

As things stand there is the possibility to enjoy whale meat here in Japan. Argue away folks, but I think i will try to have some for lunch next week. A nice Whale Katsu Karee would suit me nicely.

Natural, sustainable food is fine with me.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Here's a question for you: if this is meant to be scientific whaling... why is there a factory ship?

ICRW Article VIII, which allows the issuing of permits for research, requires the whale to be processed as far as practicable. So, to follow the regulations Japan is required to process the whales killed. Hence the need for a factory ship.

Studying behaviour of dead whales?

The research involves more than the sampling of the killed whales. Visual data is collected to document pod sizes and locations (as examples).

Japan never provided any research results

Japan provides its data to the IWC every year and the ICR maintains a website listing the research papers published.

Maybe Japan should try whale watching

There are numerous whale watching tours in Japan and have been for a long time.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

KogabrigaNov. 10 07:20 pm JST Japan never provided any research results, Japanese people blindly believe there is some research (just like anything else government tells them).

DATA

Summary lists of the data available can be downloaded below. Applications for such data shall be copied to the DAG.SubjectKb

western North Pacific common minke whales 

Genetic data for the Pre-Implementation Assessment (Japan)

Genetic data for the Pre-Implementation Assessment (USA)

Genetic data for the Pre-Implementation Assessment (Korea)

Sightings data for the Pre-Implementation Assessment (Japan)

Sightings data for the Pre-Implementation Assessment (Korea)

Data held by the International Whaling Commission12

https://iwc.int/data-availability

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

mmwkdwNov. 10 12:29 pm JSTJapan clearly doesn't like being told what to do, the more the complaints the more likely it is that they will just continue

For example,

told not to have an offensive capability - yet Japan now has the largest "defense" force in Asia and is currently considering to rename this to a "Military" force

Wrong, nowhere in their constitution does it say that.

told not to go whaling, yet continues to do so

Wrong. Japan respects the Moratorium on Commercial Whaling by not conducting Commercial Whaling. In contrast Norway and Iceland do so freely.

told to acknowledge past war crimes. yet continues to cover them up.

Wrong. The International Tribunal for the Far East was carried out decades ago. Crimes were charged and prosecuted. There are no War Crimes that Japan is "covering up".

Who are you to believe that any country can be "told" what to do? And why post utter nonsense?

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Those are not darn da-kine whaling ships.

Spy ships on the prowl.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

OssanAmerica

China and Japan also fish in the northeast Atlantic. This is consistent with international maritime law and completely legitimate according to the principle of freedom of access to the high seas. "

You said it yourself. completely legitimate. Which is anything but what Japan is doing in the Arctic.

"The Arctic, on the other hand, is not yet managed by RFMOs because fishing there is rare"

And that makes what Japan is doing right??

I don't even have to read your link to answer this one.

Yes you do. becuase you answered incorrectly.

Those "LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES" include Scientific Research Whaling under IWC Article 8 which also exempts recognition of "sanctuaries".

If one country overfished (caught too many fish) a large school of fish, then other countries would be affected when the fish moved into their waters. The Convention relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks set limits on how much fish a country could take from schools of fish.

So its not just the IWC. Please read the links provided before making completely incorrect comments.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

OssanAmerica

If the Japanese Research Whaling fleet enters and carries out whaling in Australia's EEZ then they are in clear violation and without doubt would be challenged by the appropriate Australian law enforcement authorities. That they do not is it absolute evidence that it is simply not Australian EEZ. That Australia has treaty obligations which keep it from asserting a claim is irrelevant to the issue. Nothing sleazy about complying with the law. Other signatories to the Antarctic Treaty may find Australia's attempt to assert a claim in violation of the treaty terms to be "sleazy".

Japanese whalers' security ship enters Australian waters

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/whale-watch/japanese-whalers-security-ship-enters-australian-waters-20120103-1pk1r.html

Japanese Ship Has Killed A Whale In Australian Waters

http://www.nationalgeographic.com.au/nature/japanese-ship-killed-a-whale-in-australian-sanctuary-says-sea-shepherd.aspx

Japanese ship Nisshin Maru found in Australia waters with dead whale on deck: Sea Shepherd

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-15/japanese-ship-nisshin-maru-dead-whale-found-sea-shepherd-says/8183856

Japanese Harpoon Ship Enters Australian Whale Sanctuary

https://www.seashepherd.org.au/news-and-commentary/news/japanese-harpoon-ship-enters-australian-whale-sanctuary.html

Slain Minke Whale Spotted On Japanese Boat In Australian Waters

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2017/01/15/slain-minke-whale-spotted-on-japanese-boat-in-australian-waters_a_21655370/

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

M3M3M3

@Aly

I agree. Good posts and thanks for the interesting links.

Thank you for the support. Check out some more interesting links I just posted above.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Wrong. Japan respects the Moratorium on Commercial Whaling by not conducting Commercial Whaling.

REALLY?

But dealing in whale meat "does not violate international or domestic laws in any way", said the Japanese fisheries minister, Yoshimasa Hayashi.

Hayashi told the same parliamentary committee that Rakuten had made a commercial decision as a private firm and that the increasing number of companies refusing to sell whale meat was "regrettable".

Inviting people to dine on whale in his ministry, he said a "whale week" campaign, which began on Monday, was part of efforts to let Japanese people know that whaling and eating whale meat are part of their culture.

At the opening event, Hayashi ate whale meat steak with other MPs who support whaling, before moving to a cafeteria in the farm ministry building, where he had a lunch set of whale meat tataki, a dish similar to carpaccio, seasoned with shredded green onions.

During the campaign week, visitors will be given a chance to taste a small portion of fried whale meat for free, according to the ministry.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/09/japan-pm-commerical-whaling-shinzo-abe-antartic-hunt

So explain to me the "scientific approach" behind THIS event.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Aly RustomToday 09:26 am JSTM3M3M3

@Aly

I agree. Good posts and thanks for the interesting links.

Thank you for the support. Check out some more interesting links I just posted above.

Your posts above do not disprove anything I've said. I stated that in order to violate a country's EEZ the offending vessel must be taking resources. In other words, it would have to be actually whaling. Security ships passing through an EEZ are doing so with he right of innocent passage, A whale seen within the EEZ with a whale onboard is not evidence that it was taken within the EEZ. These anti-whaling articles do their best to spin it to create the image that Japan is whaling in Australia's EEZ. To prove this you need to show me where the Australian Coast guard challenged and stopped the Japanese Research Whaling vessels because they were carrying out whaling in the Australian EEZ. Please show me a link.

As for posting anything where the Eco-Terrorist organization Seas Shepherd is the source is concerned there is zero credibility as Watson has claimed to have been shot by the whalers and even Peter Bethune and Ady Gil have called him a liar and sued him.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

There’s good whale meat selection at the supermarket, however I would like to see more. Hopefully the new foreign visitor tax will help to pay for an expansion

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Your posts above do not disprove anything I've said. I stated that in order to violate a country's EEZ the offending vessel must be taking resources. In other words, it would have to be actually whaling.

Obviously you NEVER look at the links. The links SHOW dead whales on the ships. Your comment above PROVES that you did not look at the links provided to you.

To prove this you need to show me where the Australian Coast guard challenged and stopped the Japanese Research Whaling vessels because they were carrying out whaling in the Australian EEZ. Please show me a link

HERE.

Australia has protested to Japan after a vessel from its whaling fleet entered Australia's exclusive economic zone in the Southern Ocean.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-21289000

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

And here:

A support vessel for the Japanese whaling fleet is sailing in Australian waters in pursuit of anti-whaling activists, Australia said after protesting to the Tokyo government.

Environment Minister Tony Burke said his government received confirmation Thursday that the Shonan Maru No. 2 had entered Australia’s exclusive economic zone near Macquarie Island in the Antarctic Ocean. The Australian embassy in Tokyo protested to the Japanese government, he said.

Read more at https://asiancorrespondent.com/2013/02/australia-protests-to-japan-about-whaling-ship/#szc5xpwKH5jyHPky.99

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

And THIS time if you REALLY look at the link you can see the dead whale

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Last final attempt to get through to you. A dead whale on a ship in Australian EEZ is NOT a violation. A Security Ship in the Australian EEZ is NOT a violation. This is called the right of innocent passage that all ships are entitled to. Note that the Australian government "protested but did not (could not) send their Coast Guard to interdict and stop those ships. If those ships were actually carrying out the act of "whaling" they could have.

Show me a link to where the Australian Coast Guard stopped Japanese ships from "whaling" in the Australian EEZ. You can't find one because it has never happened. Please, no more links to stories which do not prove your allegation.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Last final attempt to get through to you. A dead whale on a ship in Australian EEZ is NOT a violation.

EXCUSE ME???!! A dead whale on a ship IS a violation!! It means they caught a whale IN AUSTRALIAN WATERS where it is illegal to do so!!

A Security Ship in the Australian EEZ is NOT a violation. This is called the right of innocent passage that all ships are entitled to.

Right of innocent passage doesn't include illegal practices. It is illegal to kill whales in Australian waters. You cannot, for example, carry DRUGS in Japanese waters and claim innocent passage. That is an absolutely RIDICULOUS argument!

Note that the Australian government "protested but did not (could not) send their Coast Guard to interdict and stop those ships. If those ships were actually carrying out the act of "whaling" they could have.

Because they chose to do things the PROPER way, through proper diplomatic channels. That's what civilized countries do.

Show me a link to where the Australian Coast Guard stopped Japanese ships from "whaling" in the Australian EEZ. You can't find one because it has never happened.

First of all, please don't tell me what I can and can't find. And the reason they haven't stopped them is that Australia doesn't want to cause an even bigger diplomatic crisis. It shows that Australia is handling the situation correctly while Japan and its whaling ships are behaving like children.

Please, no more links to stories which do not prove your allegation.

They prove EVERYTHING that I have said. You, on the other hand, refuse to read the links provided to you, refuse to accept the facts presented to you, and continue to make incorrect statements backed up by false claims.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Wrong. Japan respects the Moratorium on Commercial Whaling by not conducting Commercial Whaling.

REALLY?

Yes, REALLY. The ICRW requires the whale be processed. "Any whales taken under these special permits shall so far as practicable

be processed and the proceeds shall be dealt with in accordance with directions issued by the Government by which the permit was granted." So Japan directs the meat be sold to offset part of the cost of the research. All in accordance with the regulations.

EXCUSE ME???!! A dead whale on a ship IS a violation!! It means they caught a whale IN AUSTRALIAN WATERS where it is illegal to do so!!

Obviously you DIDN'T read his comment. The whales COULD have been killed outside the EEZ and then the ship moved and entered the EEZ with the whales already dead. Also the claimed EEZ doesn't exist. Australia basically admitted this when they never brought the issue up at the ICJ (which would be the 'proper diplomatic channel' you have mentioned). It is as valid an EEZ as Sadam Hussien's claim that Kuwait was part of Iraq.

Because they chose to do things the PROPER way, through proper diplomatic channels. That's what civilized countries do.

So if a ship had been carrying drugs, as per your earlier example, they would have just protested through channels and let the ship continue on its way?

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Aly RustomNov. 11 12:41 pm JSTLast final attempt to get through to you. A dead whale on a ship in Australian EEZ is NOT a violation.

EXCUSE ME???!! A dead whale on a ship IS a violation!! It means they caught a whale IN AUSTRALIAN WATERS where it is illegal to do so!!

No you are ASSUMING where it was caught. To date there is NO RECORD of any whales being caught in Australian Waters. If you doubt this show me a link.

A Security Ship in the Australian EEZ is NOT a violation. This is called the right of innocent passage that all ships are entitled to.

Right of innocent passage doesn't include illegal practices. It is illegal to kill whales in Australian waters. You cannot, for example, carry DRUGS in Japanese waters and claim innocent passage. That is an absolutely RIDICULOUS argument!

Your comparison is what's ridiculous. Carrying drugs in Japanese waters is a crime. A security ship transiting Australian waters is not. A security ship is essentially a harpoon ship with it's harpoon system removed. Such a ship simply VANNOT be "whaling" for obvious reasons.

Note that the Australian government "protested but did not (could not) send their Coast Guard to interdict and stop those ships. If those ships were actually carrying out the act of "whaling" they could have.

Because they chose to do things the PROPER way, through proper diplomatic channels. That's what civilized countries do.

Wrong- Australia inderdicts foreign vessels fisahing within it's EEZ ALL THE TIME.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-06/spike-in-illegal-fishing-australian-waters-rising-asian-tension/7819024

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-27/australian-customs-officials-board-illegal-patagonian-toothfish/6268940

They did/could not do the same with the Japanese ship because IT WASN'T WHALING IN AUSTRALIAN WATERS as you incorrectly believe.

Show me a link to where the Australian Coast Guard stopped Japanese ships from "whaling" in the Australian EEZ. You can't find one because it has never happened.

First of all, please don't tell me what I can and can't find. And the reason they haven't stopped them is that Australia doesn't want to cause an even bigger diplomatic crisis. It shows that Australia is handling the situation correctly while Japan and its whaling ships are behaving like children.

SHOW ME THE LINK. I know you can not. Please go ahead and prove me wrong. Australia recognizes that the whaling is being done in an area that is NOT THEIR EEZ, but international waters. Claiming it as their EEZ would breach their obligations under the Antarctic Treaty.

ease, no more links to stories which do not prove your allegation.

They prove EVERYTHING that I have said. You, on the other hand, refuse to read the links provided to you, refuse to accept the facts presented to you, and continue to make incorrect statements backed up by false claims.

Not one of your links has proven that the Japanese Research Whaling ships "take whales in Australian territorial or EEZ waters" as you allege.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

No you are ASSUMING where it was caught. To date there is NO RECORD of any whales being caught in Australian Waters. If you doubt this show me a link.

I did. YOU keep asking for links which YOU NEVER READ.

Your comparison is what's ridiculous. Carrying drugs in Japanese waters is a crime. A security ship transiting Australian waters is not.

Hogwash. Killing a whale in Australian waters IS a crime.

A security ship is essentially a harpoon ship with it's harpoon system removed. Such a ship simply VANNOT be "whaling" for obvious reasons.

Then what was the dead whale doing on the ship?? PFT.

SHOW ME THE LINK. I know you can not. Please go ahead and prove me wrong.

I did. You don't check them.

Not one of your links has proven that the Japanese Research Whaling ships "take whales in Australian territorial or EEZ waters" as you allege.

There you go. MORE proof that you do not check the links provided to you. Not once. They do in fact prove EVERYTHING I said.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Yes, REALLY. The ICRW requires the whale be processed. "Any whales taken under these special permits shall so far as practicable

be processed and the proceeds shall be dealt with in accordance with directions issued by the Government by which the permit was granted." So Japan directs the meat be sold to offset part of the cost of the research. All in accordance with the regulations.

Really?? Then why did Japan lose the IWC claim 3 years ago?

EXCUSE ME???!! A dead whale on a ship IS a violation!! It means they caught a whale IN AUSTRALIAN WATERS where it is illegal to do so!!

Obviously you DIDN'T read his comment. The whales COULD have been killed outside the EEZ and then the ship moved and entered the EEZ with the whales already dead.

Still makes it illegal

Also the claimed EEZ doesn't exist. Australia basically admitted this when they never brought the issue up at the ICJ (which would be the 'proper diplomatic channel' you have mentioned). It is as valid an EEZ as Sadam Hussien's claim that Kuwait was part of Iraq.

Then explain why Japan lost the claim and was ordered to stop whaling 3 years ago. PFT

Because they chose to do things the PROPER way, through proper diplomatic channels. That's what civilized countries do.

So if a ship had been carrying drugs, as per your earlier example, they would have just protested through channels and let the ship continue on its way?

If they were being escorted by another country's official vessels? Yes. or else you are talking about naval warfare.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Aly RustomToday 08:15 am JSTYes, REALLY. The ICRW requires the whale be processed. "Any whales taken under these special permits shall so far as practicable

be processed and the proceeds shall be dealt with in accordance with directions issued by the Government by which the permit was granted." So Japan directs the meat be sold to offset part of the cost of the research. All in accordance with the regulations.

Really?? Then why did Japan lose the IWC claim 3 years ago?

Because the ICJ ruled that the Jarpa II program was deficient in two areas and required; (1)Improvement of both biological and ecological data on Antarctic minke whales. And (2)Investigation of the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem through the development of ecosystem models. These shortcomings were corrected in the next program.

EXCUSE ME???!! A dead whale on a ship IS a violation!! It means they caught a whale IN AUSTRALIAN WATERS where it is illegal to do so!!

Obviously you DIDN'T read his comment. The whales COULD have been killed outside the EEZ and then the ship moved and entered the EEZ with the whales already dead.

Still makes it illegal

Wrong- The act of "whaling" (or any taking of a marine resource) by a foreign vessel in the Australian EEZ is illegal. Transiting with a dead whale onboard alone is not. Which is why the Australian authorities did not stop and board the ship.

Also the claimed EEZ doesn't exist. Australia basically admitted this when they never brought the issue up at the ICJ (which would be the 'proper diplomatic channel' you have mentioned). It is as valid an EEZ as Sadam Hussien's claim that Kuwait was part of Iraq.

Then explain why Japan lost the claim and was ordered to stop whaling 3 years ago. PFT

See above. Fully explained.

Because they chose to do things the PROPER way, through proper diplomatic channels. That's what civilized countries do.

So if a ship had been carrying drugs, as per your earlier example, they would have just protested through channels and let the ship continue on its way?

If they were being escorted by another country's official vessels? Yes. or else you are talking about naval warfare.

What "official vessels" are escorting the Research Whaling fleet? The ICR security ships are converted harpoon ships, they are not Japan Coast Guard or military.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Aly RustomToday 08:11 am JSTNo you are ASSUMING where it was caught. To date there is NO RECORD of any whales being caught in Australian Waters. If you doubt this show me a link.

I did. YOU keep asking for links which YOU NEVER READ.

I read every one of them. Not one states that the Whaling was taking place within Australian territorial or EEZ waters.

Your comparison is what's ridiculous. Carrying drugs in Japanese waters is a crime. A security ship transiting Australian waters is not.

Hogwash. Killing a whale in Australian waters IS a crime.

Except that there is no evidence in all of your links that any whales have been killed in "Australian Waters".

A security ship is essentially a harpoon ship with it's harpoon system removed. Such a ship simply VANNOT be "whaling" for obvious reasons.

Then what was the dead whale doing on the ship?? PFT.

The dead whale was NOT on the Shonan Maru No.2 which is a security ship. If it was on the NIsshin Maru. which is a processing ship, it did not kill the whale. Whales are killed by harpoon ships which transfer the whales to the processing ship.

SHOW ME THE LINK. I know you can not. Please go ahead and prove me wrong.

I did. You don't check them.

If you did you can show me. It appears that it is YOU who is not reading your own links.

Not one of your links has proven that the Japanese Research Whaling ships "take whales in Australian territorial or EEZ waters" as you allege.

There you go. MORE proof that you do not check the links provided to you. Not once. They do in fact prove EVERYTHING I said.

No, there YOU go again. Unable to prove your allegation. Please quote from any of your links proof that the "whaling is done in Australian waters".

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Because the ICJ ruled that the Jarpa II program was deficient in two areas and required; (1)Improvement of both biological and ecological data on Antarctic minke whales. And (2)Investigation of the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem through the development of ecosystem models. These shortcomings were corrected in the next program.

Wrong. They weren't. Japan just chose to ignore the ruling and actually SAID SO.

Wrong- The act of "whaling" (or any taking of a marine resource) by a foreign vessel in the Australian EEZ is illegal. Transiting with a dead whale onboard alone is not. Which is why the Australian authorities did not stop and board the ship.

they killed the whale in australian waters. hence it is illegal. The idea that they were just transporting a dead whale through Australian waters is ridiculous.

Except that there is no evidence in all of your links that any whales have been killed in "Australian Waters

Except the DEAD WHALE. LOL

The dead whale was NOT on the Shonan Maru No.2 which is a security ship. If it was on the NIsshin Maru. which is a processing ship, it did not kill the whale. Whales are killed by harpoon ships which transfer the whales to the processing ship.

So the Shonan Maru killed the whale and transferred it onto the Nissin Maru. Or are you claiming they just FOUND the whale dead and decided to take it??

If you did you can show me. It appears that it is YOU who is not reading your own links.

First read the links before making ridiculous statements please. I provided them for you and you have not quoted them- just making claims that they don't prove anything when in fact they do.

No, there YOU go again. Unable to prove your allegation. Please quote from any of your links proof that the "whaling is done in Australian waters".

I've proved EVERYTHING I've said with a truckload of links, NONE of which you have read.

What "official vessels" are escorting the Research Whaling fleet? The ICR security ships are converted harpoon ships, they are not Japan Coast Guard or military.

You don't even know?? It was on Japan Today a while back. The Japanese Military is escorting the whaling vessels now. Thats a FACT

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

What "official vessels" are escorting the Research Whaling fleet? The ICR security ships are converted harpoon ships, they are not Japan Coast Guard or military.

You don't even know?? It was on Japan Today a while back. The Japanese Military is escorting the whaling vessels now. Thats a FACT

Show me the link. The "Japanese Military" has NEVER escorted the Research Whaling Fleet. Don't keep arguing, just post the link. I dare you. Your credibility is ZERO,

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Show me the link. The "Japanese Military" has NEVER escorted the Research Whaling Fleet. Don't keep arguing, just post the link. I dare you.

Here you go. And read it this time properly. DONT post until you have read it all. I dare YOU.

> Watson said his group had discovered Japan was employing military surveillance to monitor their movements by satellite and Japan’s whaling vessels could easily avoid them.

“We cannot compete with their military grade technology,” Watson said.

The Japanese whalers not only have all the resources and subsides their government can provide, they also have the powerful political backing of a major economic super-power,” Watson said.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-whaling/japan-wont-lower-guard-of-whaling-as-sea-shepherd-changes-tactics-official-says-idUSKCN1B90YS

Your credibility is ZERO,

NOW who's credibility is ZERO? HA!

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Aly Rustom and Ossan American, please do not address each other any further on this thread, since you are just going around in circles.

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites