national

Sea Shepherd sets out to confront Japan whalers

49 Comments

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

© 2013 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

49 Comments
Login to comment

Go get them whalers and sink their ships!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How come they never pick on the other well known whaling nations ?

-3 ( +11 / -14 )

Norway would kick their asses. That's why.

-4 ( +9 / -13 )

VicMOsaka, it's not that the sea shepherd folk doesn't pick on other nations, but the reason why they seem to focus so much energy and media attention on confronting Japan is quite simple.

The organization realizes there is an inherent bias against all things Japanese in many international nations, more so when it comes to a highly charged issue such as the killing of whales and dolphins. The sheepherdists realize this and use it to their advantage, and therefore act much bolder towards the Japanese whalers than they would other nations. They count on the international outcry against whaling and especially when Japanese do it, therefore they feel emboldened like the cowards they are to go to extremes.

Nothing is more valuable than the publicity an organization can generate by taking on one of richest (and in their minds most 'evil') nations in the world. Stirring racial animosities against Japan is a highly lucrative endeavor for Sea Shepherd, and this rabid anti Japanese racism is clear for anyone to see whenever you read their followers and supporters posting on facebook, etc.

Go Japan.

3 ( +13 / -10 )

Oldman_13...

Er no... Its because you travel all the way down here to do it! What is wrong with the whales around Japan ? Norway doesn't travel to the southern ocean to hunt whales, and we don't travel to the northern oceans to fish.

And love all the research.... Absolutely nothing from Japan worthy of reading in the past 10 years.

Tathra464

-1 ( +11 / -12 )

And love all the research.... Absolutely nothing from Japan worthy of reading in the past 10 years.

Perhaps you haven't read one, hence the clueless response.

First, Japan does conduct research in their own coastal area. Also, the reason why they need to do it in the Southern Ocean is because that's where most of the Minke whales are. The point of this is to find out the sustainability of whaling so that IWC would allow the moratorium to end and resume commercial whaling with set quota based on species type.

-11 ( +8 / -19 )

Catch those terrorists and lock them up for good! How can they be tolerated?!

-7 ( +6 / -13 )

The whalers would face arrest if they landed in Australia due to the 2007 high court order prohibiting whaling in Australias economic zone. Sea Shepherd on the other hand enjoys widespread support in Australia - evidenced by all the funding a re-fitting that has taken place there. Moreover, Australia launched a court case at the ICJ (Its clear that Japan isn`t waiting around for the ruling expected early next year) Sea Shepherd contains crew members from all nationalities, including Japan. If they were anti-Japanese, why would Japanese members bother to sail with them. Sea Shepherd is going after Japan because Japan is leaving itself wide open to be challenged over its so-called "research" whaling. Australians support Sea Shepherd (as do kiwis) because Japan, and not Iceland or Norway, are sending ships to the southern ocean. Many of these whales migrate past the Australian coast every year - helping to provide income for a whaling watching industry which is more a more profitable form of research than the one Japan claims to carry out

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

Catch those terrorists and lock them up for good! How can they be tolerated?!"

Agree completely, the whaling enviro terrorists should be locked up in port and kept away from plundering the pristine Antarctic waters.

-3 ( +6 / -10 )

aussie-musashi, marcelito,

Great scathing rhetoric, if the topic were different you could get jobs with the KCNA!

The whalers would face arrest if they landed in Australia due to the 2007 high court order prohibiting whaling in Australias economic zone.

So Australian politicians enacted such laws, did they? How many arrests have they made so far I wonder. I would guess zero? If so, how is that anything other than just political tokenism?

Moreover, Australia launched a court case at the ICJ (Its clear that Japan isn`t waiting around for the ruling expected early next year)

Why should they? Innocent until proven guilty. It's Sea Shepherd who is not waiting around for the ruling. And the Aussie government talking about sending some customs boat down there, for what purpose other than show? It will be a big embarrassment for Australia to be seen to be ignoring the decision laid out by the ICJ, should it go in Japan's favour.

Sea Shepherd is going after Japan because Japan is leaving itself wide open to be challenged over its so-called "research" whaling.

Yet they are jumping the gun, rather than wait for the ICJ decision? The ICJ is going to rule whether it is research or not. Why not wait for the result? Japan's been doing this for decades already, why not just wait until the judgement is out before racing around and causing a big fuss?

1 ( +6 / -5 )

I have seen an episode of whale wars where they were giving the people of the Faroe Islands a hard time so I don't think it's a race thing , but I do agree playing the David vs Goliath angle is good for business.

I believe of all the whaling nations, only Japan is choosing to be a member of the IWC. My guess is because it wants to ultimately make it's case for sustainable whaling and make it internationally acceptable. Thus, you could say they are researching to see if sustainable whaling is possible by killing the quota they were allowed. My question to anyone who can explain to me, why would the IWC allow Japan to harvest 50 fin and humpback whales if they were endangered? Is that label outdated? Or even endangered, does the IWC think that quota is sustainable? Or are the quotas decided by another organization and how are these numbers derived? I'm pro sustainable whaling so whaling endangered species does concern me.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

are the quotas decided by another organization and how are these numbers derived?

Japan decides its own 'quotas' (aka slaughter targets) based on how much meat they think they can sell.

4 ( +8 / -3 )

Japan decides its own 'quotas' (aka slaughter targets) based on how much meat they think they can sell. Its clear that theyve managed to sell very little.......for many years now. So much for a Japanese culinary tradition. Oh wait, its for research. Im confused. Hmmm.......

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

@cleo

Japan decides its own 'quotas' (aka slaughter targets) based on how much meat they think they can sell.

With more than 4000 tons of whale meat in frozen storage, and less than 15% of the adult population buying any, I don't think there's any connection between what the quota is and what is actually sold.

If that was case, then surly the quota would be zero?

8 ( +10 / -2 )

zichi, far be it from me to understand the workings of what passes as the brain of the homo cetaceacarnifex orientis, but I imagine they reckon the more they have in store the cheaper they can sell it, and the cheaper they can sell it the more they will sell.

As you say, there is a frozen tumulus of whale meat that nobody wants to eat (at least they haven't been able to sell it), hardly anyone eats the stuff, it makes you wonder why all the fuss about restarting commercial whaling. No way it would ever be a paying concern.

And yes, the videos of the wailers do show them to be decidedly surly. :-)

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Like I've said, all it would take is for one whaling vessel to mount a weapon on the bow and blow one of these Sea Shepherd boats out of the water and they would never bother them again. They are pirates and should be treated as such. Maybe ramming them should become SOP? I'd pay to see that.

-6 ( +6 / -12 )

after many years of research whaling by Japan, whale numbers look increasing . sustainable whaling is quite possible after all. whale meat look unique on japanese dining tables. but with so much whale meat in freezer , why japan should bother to catch more each year? too long in freezer they won't be tasty anymore.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

after many years of research whaling by Japan, whale numbers look increasing

The wailers claim they need to kill around 1000 whales a season to 'research' the whale population and determine whether or not wailing is sustainable. For many years now thanks to SS they have not 'researched' anything like those numbers, which means that by their own admission they have insufficient data to make any claims either way. They cannot claim their 'research' is even vaguely scientific, the samples are too few.

On the other hand, if they feel they can confidently state anything about whale populations from the small number of whales they manage to slip past SS, why on earth do they give themselves such huge quotas?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

@cleo

it makes you wonder why all the fuss about restarting commercial whaling. No way it would ever be a paying concern.

The last people who want to see commercial whaling return are the Japanese whalers because without the millions and billions of gov't money they wouldn't be able sail any of their ships much beyond the countries shores. Having to pay all expenses including froozen storage would probably see an end to the whole business. The Japanese don't even want the whale meat which Iceland keeps trying to import since there people don't want too.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

@zichi: Exactly. There is nothing more at stake here than stubborn pride on Japan's part

2 ( +5 / -3 )

God Speed Sea Sheppard!

7 ( +10 / -3 )

If the Japanese Govt stopped subsidising the whaling industry and let the market decide it's viability, then the industry would collapse tomorrow. There is only so much useless meat you can keep in a freezer, or for pet food. The whole industry stinks of corruption.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

So, Japan hunts whales to reasearch the feasibility of commercial whaling using permission from the organization that banned commercial whaling? Is it just me that thinks there is something terribly wrong with this? Yes, Japan was allowed to hunt a quota of whales under the regulations of the IWC, but their purpose of proving commercial whaling is viable has only become evident in the last few years. The only reason Japan has been able to stay in the IWC is due to buying votes from smaller insignificant countries. Shame on you Japan! You hoax will soon be coming to an end. Give em hell SS!

0 ( +4 / -4 )

@aussie-musashi, doesn't matter how many times you repeat it. The Japanese don't face arrest if they land in Australia. It is a Federal Court ruling, not a high court order. And the case was a civil case not a criminal case hence why arrest isn't involved.

Since the Southern Ocean whaling season is December thru March it is not reasonable for the Japanese to wait for the ICJ ruling. Also Japan expects to win the case, so again no reason to wait.

LOL! Because they have one or two individual Japanese does not mean they don't have a bias against Japanese as a group.

If the issue is over 'research' whaling, why doesn't the SSCS conduct operations against Japan's Northern Pacific whaling (which is also research whaling)? And why did Australia only bring Japan's Southern Ocean whaling to the ICJ and not even mention Japan's Northern Pacific whaling?

So Australians can profit from exploiting the whales but Japan can't profit from exploiting the whales. Sure sounds like a bias to me.

@Peter Nozawa Thurwachter, Did you see them attempt to board any boats in the Faroe islands? How about throwing any butyric acid? Or use any prop foulers? The SSCS actions against the Japanese in NINE trips are markedly different then their ONE trip to the Faroe islands.

Norway, Iceland and Greenland (thru Denmark) are all members of the IWC and they all hunt whales.

@cleo, so because protesters prevent them from collecting enough samples it means the researchers are wrong and should just give up? Yeah that makes sense.

And statistics doesn't say that having fewer samples makes the research invalid. It just makes the Confidence Level lower.

If the Japanese Govt stopped subsidising the whaling industry and let the market decide it's viability, then the industry would collapse tomorrow.

And if the SSCS stopped harrassing them, they could do just that without looking like they were caving in.

The only reason Japan has been able to stay in the IWC is due to buying votes from smaller insignificant countries.

No the reason Japan has been able to stay is the IWC is because they haven't decided to leave. No one has every tried or suggested kicking them out.

Also the only reason the moratorium was enacted was because the anti-whalers buying votes from small insignificant countries.

-2 ( +4 / -5 )

First, Japan does conduct research in their own coastal area. Also, the reason why they need to do it in the Southern Ocean is because that's where most of the Minke whales are. The point of this is to find out the sustainability of whaling so that IWC would allow the moratorium to end and resume commercial whaling with set quota based on species type.

@nigelboy - I was speechless for a while there.. so you really do believe the 'scientific research' line they feed you?

5 ( +7 / -2 )

All whaling across the planet should be stopped now. It's disgusting, cruel and, to me, just wrong.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

@nigelboy - I was speechless for a while there.. so you really do believe the 'scientific research' line they feed you?

Mitch Cohen

Have you even read any of the papers submitted to the IWC's scientific committee? Do you think the estimated population is derived out of vacuum as if these whales fill out census forms?

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

The SSCS actions against the Japanese in NINE trips are markedly different then their ONE trip to the Faroe islands

SS go to the Faroe Islands every year, Just because you don't know about it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. The 'grind' as it is called is even more meaningless, mindless and barbaric than the Antarctic fiascos. The 'traditional' hunt is supposed to be for the purpose of providing meat, but the meat of the pilot whales and dolphins that are hacked to death on the beaches is polluted and has been declared unfit for human consumption by the chief medical officers of the islands. Most of it is left on the beaches to rot.

so because protesters prevent them from collecting enough samples it means the researchers are wrong and should just give up?

No, because they are inflicting slow, painful inhumane deaths on animals for no legitimate reason is why they are wrong and should stop. The fact that by their own admission they do not take enough samples to provide valid data is why they cannot seriously claim to have evidence as to whether whale populations can 'support' a 'sustainable' slaughter.

And statistics doesn't say that having fewer samples makes the research invalid. It just makes the Confidence Level lower.

When you have little more than 10% of what you set yourself as the minimum necessary number of samples, the Confidence Level is so low as to make the 'science' meaningless. If they can get valid data from fewer samples, there is no need to set such huge quotas in the first place.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

@Thunderbird2: I agree. Not only whaling, but also the hunting of any other endangered species

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Do you think the estimated population is derived out of vacuum as if these whales fill out census forms?

It's wrung out of the fraction of the number of data samples the 'researchers' claim to need. It's meaningless.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

It's wrung out of the fraction of the number of data samples the 'researchers' claim to need. It's meaningless.

I hate to break it to you cleo but marine resources that number in hundred of thousands to millions don't come out of the water and be counted. The estimated population as well as the sustainability numbers are based on "catches" and analyzing the biological aspects of them.

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

cleoDec. 19, 2013 - 04:45PM JST "are the quotas decided by another organization and how are these numbers derived? Japan decides its own 'quotas' (aka slaughter targets) based on how much meat they think they can sell.

Cleo, please provide evidence to support the last part of your statement.

As far as I am aware, while the Permit applicant (Japan) does set the numbers, the entire program, it's objectives and intended take numbers are submitted to the IWC Scientific Committee in advance for review and is adjusted accordingly. How the "amount of whale meat they can sell" has any bearing on the determining the figures escapes me.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

With more than 4000 tons of whale meat in frozen storage, and less than 15% of the adult population buying any, I don't think there's any connection between what the quota is and what is actually sold.

There are 63,000 tons of shrimp in frozen storage as well. Should the quota for that be zero as well?

The problem with these "activists" argument is that they hide these monthly movement of inventory (in/out) only focusing in the peak where the inventory is at its highest while competely ignoring the later trends where inventory declines.

http://www.market.jafic.or.jp/suisan/

-11 ( +3 / -14 )

SS go to the Faroe Islands every year

No they don't. One year that sent one 'undercover operative', who ran away when he was recognized. And ONE year they sent 2 of their boats. That is not 'every year' by any stretch of the imigination.

Most of it is left on the beaches to rot.

No most of it is collecetd and eaten. Even the SSCS's own video shows this.

No,

Well if the number of samples collecetd isn't a reason to stop, why was it brought up?

When you have little more than 10% of what you set yourself as the minimum necessary number of samples, the Confidence Level is so low as to make the 'science' meaningless. If they can get valid data from fewer samples, there is no need to set such huge quotas in the first place.

And you need to read the research plan. The target numbers they set are based on the required samples for a few of their lines of research. Other issues require fewer samples. But again, if the harrassment by protesters makes the science meaningless, then that is the fault of the protestors. And since the researchers can't know from year to year if they will collect the desired number of samples, all they can do is try their best.

Not only whaling, but also the hunting of any other endangered species

Minke whales, which are over 99% of those caught in the Southern Ocean, aren't endangered.

-4 ( +5 / -8 )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYtecbI6ve8

Here it is, scientists review every single Japanese research paper on whaling up until a few years ago.

Basically shows that the 'scientific research' line is just a front for hunting whales.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Here it is, scientists review every single Japanese research paper on whaling up until a few years ago.

3 scientists paid by a group against whaling spend a few hours and you call that proof. LOL!

-9 ( +4 / -12 )

If Japan can prove that whaling is indeed sustainable, then there is no reason to stop whaling unless there is no market for it. Lets say that population of mink whale in Antartic waters is about 500,000 if Japan wants to catch 1000,SS makes them take 500 and the number keeps increasing then obviously" sustainable whaling" is more than 500.There is nothing to worry about. Australia is against whaling but like to drink krill oil thus taking away whale food. and that's ok.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Here it is, scientists review every single Japanese research paper on whaling up until a few years ago.

I loved it. 7:45 "You don't need age data". WTF???!!!!

That's is a big "X" missing from a catch at age stock assessment.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

3 scientists paid by a group against whaling spend a few hours and you call that proof. LOL!

At least you acknowledge they are mainstream scientists. Same can't be said of the people behind the 'scientific' whaling research..

5 ( +8 / -4 )

Mitch CohenDec. 20, 2013 - 08:15AM JST "3 scientists paid by a group against whaling spend a few hours and you call that proof. LOL!"

At least you acknowledge they are mainstream scientists. Same can't be said of the people behind the 'scientific' >whaling research..

You're right, they aren't "mainstream". They are specialists, like the scientists that sit on the IWC Scientific committee.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Godspeed Sea Shepherd, and a swift end to Japan's whaling operations

1 ( +9 / -7 )

>The estimated population as well as the sustainability numbers are based on "catches" and analyzing the biological aspects of them

Sigh. No one is asking them to go out and count every last whale in the ocean.

The 'researchers' claim they need a catch of around 1000 to do the 'research'. They do not catch anywhere near that number, so any analysis they do based on the small numbers they do have is invalid. If they can make valid, supportable estimates on a catch of 100, why do they give themselves a quota of over 1000?

3 ( +5 / -3 )

GO SS GIVE THEM HELL! oh and a few stick bombs from me LOL

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Would be ironically funny if the Sea Shepherd got rammed by whales! Would probably put an end to the friction! Hopefully, anyway!

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Japan is everyone's favorite kicking-boy. The Japanese did not cause extinction of whales, it was Europe and US. Remember "Mobey Dick" ends in the Sea of Japan? Remember why American Commadore Perry originally went to open isolated Japan in 1853? It was to make places for American whalers to get re-supplied. But now that the disaster has happened, Japan gets the blame for everything, like its JUST JAPAN'S FAULT!!!! How typical of Americans. Blame everyone else.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Not really. Which nation is the one claiming to be conducting "research whaling"? Hmm, let me think

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

@aussie-musashi, that would be the nation who's scientists publish peer reviewed research papers on whales based on the lethal research data.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Disillusioned - .....Japan was allowed to hunt a quota of whales under the regulations of the IWC, but their purpose of proving commercial whaling is viable has only become evident in the last few years. The only reason Japan has been able to stay in the IWC is due to buying votes from smaller insignificant countries.

Japan can stay or leave the International Whaling Commission (IWC) on their own accord.

It was the WWF who deliberately stacked the IWC with non-whaling nations in a vain attempt to get enough IWC (a "whaling" commission) members to ban all whaling.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Sigh. No one is asking them to go out and count every last whale in the ocean.

Good. Then let's lift the moratorium and set the quota.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites