Rob McIntyre comments

It should be noted that the March 31st, 2014 decision by the International Court of Justice was limited to JARPA II and the SEI whales being taken in the North Pacific were taken under an entirely other program called JARPN, as stipulated on the Special Permit Catches page on the International Whaling Commission site.

It should also be noted that the International Court of Justice had actually concluded "that the JARPA II activities involving the lethal sampling of whales can broadly be characterized as “scientific research” (Paragraph 127, p.45) and that "that the evidence shows that, at least for some of the data sought by JARPA II researchers, non‑lethal methods are not feasible", a statement agreed upon by all parties, as stipulated in Paragraph 133, p.47 of the decision (All of the parties involved in that case had agreed "that non‑lethal methods are not a feasible means to examine internal organs and stomach contents").

That said, the purpose of sanctions is to force compliance and in this case Japan is no longer implementing special catch permit programs under the IWC and the byproducts of their JARPN program are dwindling, slowly being consumed into non-existence.

They passed on the opportunity to enact sanctions during both JARPN I and JARPN II and they passed on making the distribution of Fin whale meat from JARPA II an issue so what's the point of all of this? Are they trying to justify their existence and funding?

Question: Was this company founded during this said occupation? Because from what i've heard it had been founded in 1949, two years after the Empire of Japan was dissolved and only starting franchising in March 1984.

This store generated 360 billion won per year at their 65 stores in Korea by 2011 so how does this association fallacy based boycott not hurt the Korean economy?

Wish I could attend. I use a Walkman mp3 player.

The paper by T. Endo et al. ("Mercury Contamination in the Red Meat of Whales and Dolphins Marketed for Human Consumption in Japan", Environ. Sci. Technol. 37, p2681-2685, (2003)) reported on the mercury content of whale meat sold in Japanese supermarkets. It found that mercury levels in all samples exceeded the levels permitted by the Japanese government.

No, not all samples. Here is a quote from the Abstract portion of this very study:

*"On the other hand, T-Hg concentrations in all mystecete red meat samples except for one (0.01−0.54 μg/wet g, n = 62) were below the permitted level of T-Hg, probably reflecting their lower trophic levels." - DOI: 10.1021/es034055n*

You also appear to have failed to notice the levels found in fish that is routinely consumed through-out the world, that the FDA has catalogues in "Mercury Levels in Commercial Fish and Shellfish (1990-2012)".

The moderate consumption of those had been recommended, with strict guidelines for pregnant and nursing women, of course.

There are so many other things to eat. But some people are determined to push everything in the sea into extinction. Whales, sharks, tuna, you name it.

Japan's primary target in their research was the minke whale, whose IUCN Red List status is "least concern".

Highly intelligent living creatures should best not be eaten. Whales are amazing animals.

Pigs have been deemed intelligent as well yet...

All whale meat should be tested for mercury and radiation. Anybody selling this heavily contaminated flesh should face prison, fines and their boats confiscated.

The EIA conducted testing for their "Mercury Rising" report and confirmed that low rates of contamination are found in Antarctic minke whales, well bellow the 1 ppm range found in routinely consumed fish by the FDA's "Mercury Levels in Commercial Fish and Shellfish (1990-2012)" database. And the also found low levels in Brides Whale meat taken from the North Pacific.

FYI, Antarctica's distance from industry and the Antarctica Circumpolar Current keeps most pollutants at bay.

In regards to radiation in the Pacific, in refer you to the 2016 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution study entitled "Fukushima Daiichi–Derived Radionuclides in the Ocean: Transport, Fate, and Impacts" (DOI: 10.1146/annurev-marine-010816-060733), which confirmed the levels of radiation in the pacific have dropped to levels prior to the Fukushima incident.

research whaling? what a laugh. the only thing they're researching is how much money they can make.

This is the atypical response one gets from fans of a particular group, that insists no research exists and discourages their fans to look for it. But this research and links to the data and internationally published reports on this information are not only made available via the Institute of Cetacean Research web site but the International Court of Justice confirmed in their March 31st, 2014 judgement that some of this research had merit (ISSN 0074-4441/ ISBN 978-92-1-071178-4) :

"...the Court thus finds that the JARPA II activities involving the lethal sampling of whales can broadly be characterized as “scientific research”. There is no need therefore, in the context of this case, to examine generally the concept of “scientific research”. (Paragraph 127, p.45)

"The Court notes that the Parties agree that non‑lethal methods are not a feasible means to examine internal organs and stomach contents. The Court therefore considers that the evidence shows that, at least for some of the data sought by JARPA II researchers, non‑lethal methods are not feasible." (Paragraph 133. p.47)

"Turning to the reliability and value of data collected in JARPA II the Court heard conflicting evidence. For example, the experts called by Australia questioned the reliability of age data obtained from ear plugs and the scientific value of the examination of stomach contents, given pre‑existing knowledge of the diet of the target species. The expert called by Japan disputed Australia’s contentions regarding the reliability and value of data collected in JARPA II. This disagreement appears to be about a matter of scientific opinion." (Paragraph 134. p.47)

You'll notice than neither are linked from any publication, blog or site created by the group in question. This is because the group had not only lied about the above conclusions but the following as well:

" As previously indicated, the fact that a programme uses lethal methods despite the availability of non‑lethal alternatives does not mean that a special permit granted for such a programme necessarily falls outside Article VIII, paragraph 1 (see paragraph 83)." (Paragraph 137. p.47)

"...the Court sees no reason to evaluate the evidence in support of the Parties’ competing contentions about whether or not JARPA II has attributes of commercial whaling." (Paragraph 230. p.72)

" The Court sees no need to order the additional remedy requested by Australia, which would require Japan to refrain from authorizing or implementing any special permit whaling which is not for purposes of scientific research within the meaning of Article VIII. That obligation already applies to all States parties. It is to be expected that Japan will take account of the reasoning and conclusions contained in this Judgment as it evaluates the possibility of granting any future permits under Article VIII, paragraph 1, of the Convention." (Paragraph 246. p.76)

So the research does exist and the International Court of Justice did not invalidate it as commercial or forbid Japan to engage in further activity that involved special catch permits, regardless of the repeated assertions of the defendants in Case ID 12-35266 and ICDR Case No. 50 20 1300 0952.

Pukey2 - You are more likely to get mercury from cans of albacore tuna than whale meat from Antarctica.

The Environmental Investigation Agency sampled this meat for their "Mercury Rising" report and found the vast majority of the samples were below 0.1 ppm and the maximum levels issued by the WHO/FAO, United States, Australia and Japan is 0.5 ppm. None of the samples from Antarctica surpassed 0.277 ppm, which would even comply with the U.k's 0.3 ppm maximum.

Selenium has also been found to counteract mercury's effects on humans and this element occurs naturally in fish, seafood and marine mammal meat (including whale). (doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2010.06.004)

I wish more people would actually read the March 31st, 2014 ruling by the International Court of Justice. They never quoted an International Law and if you search the document the terms "illegal" and "poaching" don't appear in it.

Here are some quotes that some people might find rather interesting :

"Based on the information before it, the Court thus finds that the JARPA II activities involving the lethal sampling of whales can broadly be characterized as “scientific research”. There is no need therefore, in the context of this case, to examine generally the concept of “scientific research”." - Paragraph 127

"The Court notes that the Parties agree that non-lethal methods are not a feasible means to examine internal organs and stomach contents. The Court therefore considers that the evidence shows that, at least for some of the data sought by JARPA II researchers, non-lethal methods are not feasible." - Paragraph 133

"The Court sees no need to order the additional remedy requested by Australia, which would require Japan to refrain from authorizing or implementing any special permit whaling which is not for purposes of scientific research within the meaning of Article VIII. That obligation already applies to all States parties. It is to be expected that Japan will take account of the reasoning and conclusions contained in this Judgment as it evaluates the possibility of granting any future permits under Article VIII, paragraph 1, of the Convention." _ Paragraph 24

Isn't it interesting that we keep on hearing that the dolphin drive is a secret that Japan is trying to hide ? Would you create a museum dedicated to your secrets ?