tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/whaling-353/articles
Whaling – The Conversation
2023-10-12T02:48:26Z
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/213556
2023-10-12T02:48:26Z
2023-10-12T02:48:26Z
For generations, killer whales and First Nations hunted whales together. Now we suspect the orca group has gone extinct
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/548727/original/file-20230918-21-qfq7hs.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C4%2C3243%2C1784&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Whalers and Old Tom on the hunt </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/Killer_whale_%28Old_Tom%29_and_whalers_-_original.jpeg">Charles Eden Wellings/WIkimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>For generations, the Thaua people worked with killer whales to hunt large whales in the water of Twofold Bay, on the southern coast of New South Wales. Killer whales – commonly known as orcas – would herd their giant prey into shallower waters where hunters could spear them. Humans would get the meat, but the killer whales wanted a delicacy – the tongue.</p>
<p>After colonists dispossessed the Thaua, Europeans began capitalising on this longstanding partnership. From around 1844, commercial whalers worked with employed Thaua and killer whales to hunt these giants. The pods of killer whales would find a prized <a href="https://au.whales.org/whales-dolphins/what-is-baleen/">baleen whale</a>, herd it closer to shore and signal the whalers, who lived in the town of Eden.</p>
<p>The partnership has no parallel anywhere in the world: the top predator of the oceans working with the top predator on land.</p>
<p>One killer whale, Old Tom, <a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/running-ponies/the-legend-of-old-tom-and-the-gruesome-law-of-the-tongue/">became legendary</a> due to his active role in the hunts for at least three decades. He was seven metres long and weighed six tonnes. </p>
<p>In 1930, he was found dead at a local beach – the last of his group in Eden. You can see his body preserved in Eden’s <a href="https://killerwhalemuseum.com.au/">Killer Whale Museum</a>. But questions have lingered. Do Old Tom’s descendants still roam the oceans, or did they die out? </p>
<p>Our <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jhered/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jhered/esad058/7308443">new research</a> suggests these famous killer whales are likely to be extinct.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/548733/original/file-20230918-27-y38zuy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="killer whales of Eden, australia" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/548733/original/file-20230918-27-y38zuy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/548733/original/file-20230918-27-y38zuy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/548733/original/file-20230918-27-y38zuy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/548733/original/file-20230918-27-y38zuy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/548733/original/file-20230918-27-y38zuy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=570&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/548733/original/file-20230918-27-y38zuy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=570&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/548733/original/file-20230918-27-y38zuy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=570&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The killer whales of Eden, including Old Tom at top right.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Eden Killer Whale Museum</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Old Tom’s origins</h2>
<p>Adaptability, cultural traditions and female-led societies have made killer whales the ultimate ocean predator. These intelligent marine mammals are the world’s largest dolphin, and the only species known to successfully hunt adult <a href="https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecy.3875">great white sharks</a> and the world’s largest living animal – <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/mms.12906">blue whales</a>. </p>
<p>But different groups can live <a href="https://www.norwegianorcasurvey.no/about-orcas">very different lives</a>. Some are constantly on the move, while others stay living in a particular region. Some feed exclusively on one type of prey, while others feed on many. Across the globe, killer whale vocalisations differ greatly, with different dialects and languages unique to families and regions. </p>
<p>To find out where these killer whales of Eden came from, we drilled into one of Old Tom’s teeth and analysed the resulting powder to sequence his DNA. We used the same methods used to extract DNA from Neanderthal remains and million-year-old mammoths. </p>
<p>When we compared Old Tom’s DNA to a global data set of killer whales, his genome was most similar to those of modern New Zealand killer whales. He shared a most recent common ancestor with killer whales from the northern Pacific, northern Atlantic, and Australasia. </p>
<p>But there was no sign of any recent descendants in our modern killer whales data set. Old Tom’s DNA is mostly distinct from modern populations. That suggests the famous <a href="https://danielleclode.com.au/killers-in-eden">killers of Eden</a> may have died out. </p>
<h2>Whale brothers</h2>
<p>The ancestors of Steven Holmes, a Thaua Traditional Owner, had close ties to both the killer whales and to the colonist whalers. Steven has worked with us to give the Thaua perspective. His advocacy helped <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/sep/30/nsw-renames-national-park-over-pastoralist-ben-boyds-links-to-slavery-in-pacific">change the name</a> of Eden’s Ben Boyd National Park to Beowa, which is Thaua for killer whale. Ben Boyd was a whaler as well as a notorious slaver, forcing Pacific people onto boats and into indentured labour. </p>
<p>Steven told us: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>In Twofold Bay, the coastal Thaua people, part of the Yuin nation, had a connection with the killer whales through the Dreaming. Their long relationship was highly valued by the Thaua, who depended on the ocean for food and other resources. They considered the killer whales their brothers. When a Thaua died, they were believed to be reincarnated as killer whales. That way, the Thaua always remained one mob – whether whale or man.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thaua people used specialised hunting strategies that encouraged killer whales to herd baleen whales, such as humpbacks, closer to shore for them to kill. After a successful kill, the killer whales were rewarded with the tongue while the Thaua got the rest of the carcass. This became known as the “Law of the Tongue”. </p>
<p>After colonisation, white whalers capitalised on this relationship. They hired many skilled First Nations whalers. </p>
<p>When killer whales found a whale, some would slap their tails in front of the whaling station to alert the whalers. Some killer whales would herd the target into shallower water, while others would harry and tire it out. Eventually, the whalers would harpoon the exhausted whale, following it with the killing lance to pierce vital organs. </p>
<p>Old Tom was active in these hunts, reported to grab the lines of the boat to pull the whalers out faster, or tug on the line to drive the harpoon deeper and speed up the whale’s death. </p>
<p>The whalers left the carcass on a buoy for up to two days to allow the killer whales to eat the tongue and lips.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/548731/original/file-20230918-15-8qik2n.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="whalers and killer whales hunting whales together`" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/548731/original/file-20230918-15-8qik2n.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/548731/original/file-20230918-15-8qik2n.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/548731/original/file-20230918-15-8qik2n.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/548731/original/file-20230918-15-8qik2n.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/548731/original/file-20230918-15-8qik2n.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=477&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/548731/original/file-20230918-15-8qik2n.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=477&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/548731/original/file-20230918-15-8qik2n.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=477&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">European whalers and killer whales on a hunt towards the end of whaling in Eden, some time between 1910 and 1920.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Eden Killer Whale Museum</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Where did they go?</h2>
<p>Eden’s whaling station did not process any whales after 1928, as whale numbers had plummeted. The killer whales had already begun to vanish. </p>
<p>Why did they leave? We don’t know for sure, but hypotheses include a lack of other food or even a breach of the Law of the Tongue by whalers. </p>
<p>What we do know is the group has never returned, and our new DNA evidence suggests that Old Tom’s group does not have any descendants in our oceans today.</p>
<p>Since they left, there have been <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-28/killer-whale-pod-spotted-off-nsw-far-south-coast/101012770">only a handful</a> of killer whale sightings off Eden. </p>
<p>While they are gone, they are not forgotten. The legacy of the killer whales of Eden lives on among Thaua people and local communities.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/213556/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
On New South Wales’ southern coast, First Nations groups and European whalers hunted alongside orcas. But what happened to this unusual group?
Isabella Reeves, PhD Candidate, Flinders University
Steven Holmes, Traditional knowledge holder, Indigenous Knowledge
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/202620
2023-03-30T04:04:02Z
2023-03-30T04:04:02Z
Whether you’re a snorkeller or CEO, you can help save our vital kelp forests
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518366/original/file-20230330-21-mdwwxo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=40%2C8%2C5422%2C3628&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>What if we told you the world has forests harbouring creatures with three hearts and where the canopy can grow by a foot a day? What if we told you it was silently disappearing? What if we told you we now have the chance to bring it back?</p>
<p>These wonder-filled and remarkably productive ecosystems are kelp forests. They wrap around <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327606143_Status_and_Trends_for_the_World%27s_Kelp_Forests">almost a third</a> of the world’s coastlines. If you live in New York, Los Angeles, Sydney or Tokyo, you can snorkel over a kelp forest on a day trip, and potentially spot a seahorse or three-hearted octopus. </p>
<p>Kelp forests have even influenced human migration patterns. The so-called “<a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15564890701628612">kelp highway</a>” suggests the first Americans settled on the continent by following the kelp-dominated coastline of the Pacific Rim, feeding on plentiful fish and molluscs. </p>
<p>But these vast forests of the sea are little known compared to coral reefs. That’s a tragedy, given they support some of our most lucrative fisheries such as lobster and abalone, house thousands of species, and can capture great amounts of carbon. </p>
<p>Kelp forests are dying at a rate similar to <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jpy.13239">coral reefs or rainforests</a>. In some areas, we have seen near total loss of kelp forests in living memory, and sometimes in just a few years. This includes losing 95% of bull kelp in northern California and 95% of giant kelp <a href="https://theconversation.com/can-selective-breeding-of-super-kelp-save-our-cold-water-reefs-from-hotter-seas-170271">in Tasmania</a>.</p>
<p>But this is not a bad news story. This is about you and your ability to help. You might think – what can I do? I’m not a scientist. But all around the world, communities and individuals are working to restore these ecosystems. It might be planting out baby kelp with mask and snorkel, removing destructive sea urchin swarms or even creating art to draw attention to these forgotten forests. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Scuba diver planting kelp forest underwater" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/517601/original/file-20230327-28-y6a0wp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/517601/original/file-20230327-28-y6a0wp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517601/original/file-20230327-28-y6a0wp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517601/original/file-20230327-28-y6a0wp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517601/original/file-20230327-28-y6a0wp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517601/original/file-20230327-28-y6a0wp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517601/original/file-20230327-28-y6a0wp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">This diver is replanting a kelp forest.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">John Turnbull</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>From citizen science to community-led recovery</h2>
<p>This year, we issued the <a href="https://kelpforestalliance.com/kelp-forest-challenge">Kelp Forest Challenge</a> to communities around the world: let’s aim to protect 3 million hectares of surviving kelp and restore one million more hectares by 2040.</p>
<p>A task this size can’t be achieved just by scientists and researchers. We need communities to play an active part. Just as people turn out in droves for Clean Up Australia Day to replant native plants along creeks or fish out introduced carp, we believe community backing is the only way we will be able to regenerate the oceans.</p>
<p>We’re not alone in this. Many other groups are looking to community help to expand restoration efforts. Think of South Australia’s <a href="https://ozfish.org.au/projects/seeds-for-snapper-south-australia/">Seeds for Snapper program</a>, which relies on beachcombers collecting seagrass fruit to aid replanting of the seagrass meadows which act as fish nurseries. </p>
<p>The stakes are high. Last year, nations signed the Kunming-Montreal <a href="https://www.cbd.int/article/cop15-final-text-kunming-montreal-gbf-221222">biodiversity pact</a>, which included pledging to protect 30% of the world’s oceans by 2030. </p>
<p>We have to ensure our remaining kelp forests are covered. At present, very few kelp forests have any measure of protection. They’re often forgotten or excluded from marine management plans.</p>
<p>But they are vital. Australia’s Great Southern Reef, for instance, is the <a href="https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/whos-heard-great-southern-reef#:%7E:text=The%20Great%20Southern%20Reef%20is,to%20Kalbarri%20in%20Western%20Australia.">kelp counterpart</a> to the far better known Great Barrier Reef. Where the coral peters out in northern New South Wales, the kelp starts, spanning thousands of kilometres across Australia and stopping only in Kalbarri, Western Australia. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-great-southern-reef-is-in-more-trouble-than-the-great-barrier-reef-201235">The Great Southern Reef is in more trouble than the Great Barrier Reef</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Some countries are tackling this at a national level. South Korea <a href="https://kelpforestalliance.com/restoration-projects/korea-fisheries-resources-agency-fira-south-korea">has pledged</a> to restore an additional 30,000 hectares of kelp forest by 2030. We now need other countries to follow suit.</p>
<p>Yet, there are many ways to help kelp. In Tasmania, for instance, the government subsidised a <a href="https://fishing.tas.gov.au/community/long-spined-sea-urchin-management/long-spined-sea-urchin-strategy">sea urchin fishery</a>. Why? Because as climate change brings warmer waters, kelp-munching, long-spined sea urchins have migrated from the mainland and now number in the millions. Recreational divers have also been asked to help by removing urchins they spot. </p>
<h2>Is it possible?</h2>
<p>Stopping environmental collapse can seem like an impossible task. But take heart. Remember – we’ve already overcome other seemingly unachievable conservation challenges.</p>
<p>We once used whale oil to fuel our lamps, soap up in the bath and even make sandwiches. But our demand for this oily product soon outstripped supply. Whalers with harpoons drove them almost to extinction. Once considered inexhaustible, humpbacks were hunted down to <a href="https://www.elsevier.com/books/encyclopedia-of-marine-mammals/wursig/978-0-12-804327-1">just 5%</a> of their previous population size. </p>
<p>This ecological tragedy gave way to one of our <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-big-comeback-its-time-to-declare-victory-for-australian-humpback-whale-conservation-44970">greatest conservation successes</a>. After getting together, coordinating and acting, we banned whaling. The humpback population has soared to <a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/13006/50362794#population">over 135,000</a>.</p>
<p>In this case, simply stopping what we were doing allowed the whales to rebound from near extinction. But we’re not so lucky with our kelp forests.</p>
<p>We have tried cleaning up water pollution, removing pest species and even stopping local harvests. But in many cases, stopping the original cause of decline hasn’t been enough to entice these ecosystems to return. This sobering fact means it’s time to put on our wetsuits and get to work actively restoring undersea forests.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1628306174272770050"}"></div></p>
<p>So what can you do? </p>
<p>Do you run a business? Stopping pollution from flowing into rivers is one way to help kelp, as well as avoiding development in sensitive coastal areas. </p>
<p>Even better, some businesses are moving towards being nature positive. That is, their work regenerates nature rather than depletes it. Think of the people in Moreton Bay fisheries active in <a href="https://ozfish.org.au/projects/moreton-bay-shellfish-reef-restoration/">restoring local oyster reefs</a>. </p>
<p>Tech companies can help by monitoring marine forest health. Kelp farmers can provide seed stock and baby kelp for restoration. Tourism operators can promote kelp forests and their creatures – think of the <a href="https://www.whyalla.com/cuttlefish">growing fame</a> of the giant cuttlefish breeding season in Whyalla. </p>
<p>And if you’re a keen community member? You can help by volunteering your time with citizen science projects like the <a href="https://reeflifesurvey.com/">Reef Life Survey</a>, forming community groups to steward and protect your patch of the ocean or contributing to existing restoration projects like Sydney’s <a href="http://www.operationcrayweed.com/">Operation Crayweed</a>.</p>
<p>We can no longer rely on the oceans to heal themselves. We’ll need help from all levels of society to make it happen.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/can-selective-breeding-of-super-kelp-save-our-cold-water-reefs-from-hotter-seas-170271">Can selective breeding of 'super kelp' save our cold water reefs from hotter seas?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202620/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Aaron Eger is the Founder and Program Director of the Kelp Forest Alliance, a research driven not-for-profit organization. The Kelp Forest Alliance is supported by the Nature Conservancy, The Banner Foundation, the Van Dyson Foundation, and UNSW Sydney.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adriana Vergés is one of the lead scientists of Operation Crayweed, a kelp restoration project that has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the NSW Fishing Trust, the NSW Environmental Trust, Sustainable Surf and Patagonia as well as private philanthropists. She is one of the Directors of the Kelp Forest Alliance, a newly established not-for-profit organisation. The Kelp Forest Alliance is supported by The Nature Conservancy, the Banner Foundation, the Van Dyson Foundation and UNSW Sydney.</span></em></p>
When we stopped whaling, the whales recovered. But our vital kelp forests won’t return without our help
Aaron Eger, Postdoctoral research fellow, UNSW Sydney
Adriana Vergés, Professor in marine ecology, UNSW Sydney
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/186709
2022-08-12T12:18:20Z
2022-08-12T12:18:20Z
The Soviet Union once hunted endangered whales to the brink of extinction – but its scientists opposed whaling and secretly tracked its toll
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478792/original/file-20220811-17-rlavkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=7%2C7%2C5084%2C3237&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Soviet whalers manning mechanized harpoons in 1960.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/whalers-russia-1960-news-photo/1205993604">Marka/Universal Images Group via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Every year, an estimated <a href="https://awionline.org/content/whale-watching">13 million people</a> go whale-watching around the world, marveling at the sight of the largest animals ever to inhabit Earth. It’s a dramatic reversal from a century ago, when few people ever saw a living whale. The creatures are still recovering from massive industrial-scale hunting that <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/world-s-whaling-slaughter-tallied-at-3-million/">nearly wiped out several species</a> in the 20th century. </p>
<p>The history of whaling shows how humans have wreaked careless havoc on the ocean, but also how they can change course. In my new book, “<a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/R/bo137529766.html">Red Leviathan: The Secret History of Soviet Whaling</a>,” I describe how the Soviet Union was central both to this deadly industry and to scientific research that helps us understand whales’ recovery. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Kye7QuBiLNc?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">A humpback whale breaches in Boston Harbor on Aug. 2, 2022. Whaling greatly reduced humpback whale numbers, but the species is recovering under international protection.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>From wood to steel and bad to worse</h2>
<p>At the start of the 20th century, it seemed whales might gain a reprieve after years of hunting. The era of whaling from sail boats, depicted in such memorable detail by Herman Melville in “<a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-true-life-horror-that-inspired-moby-dick-17576/">Moby-Dick</a>,” had nearly wiped out slow, fat species like right and bowhead whales, and also wreaked substantial harm to <a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/whaling-interview-dr-tim-d-smith/">sperm whales</a>.</p>
<p>In the 1800s, U.S. whalers sailed without restraint or hindrance into every corner of the world’s oceans, including waters around Russia’s Siberian empire. There, tsarist officials watched in helpless rage as Americans slaughtered whales upon which <a href="https://iwc.int/management-and-conservation/whaling/aboriginal/russian-federation">many of the region’s Indigenous peoples relied</a>. </p>
<p>In the 1870s, petroleum began to replace whale oil as a fuel. With few catchable whales remaining, the industry appeared to be near its end. But whalers found new markets. Through hydrogenation – a chemical process that can be used to <a href="https://www.thoughtco.com/definition-of-hydrogenation-604530">turn liquid oils into solid or semi-solid fats</a> – manufacturers were able to <a href="https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/what-is-margarine-made-of">transform smelly whale products</a> into odorless margarine for human consumption. </p>
<p>Around the same time, Norwegians invented the <a href="http://www.mobydick-hermanmelville.com/History_Historical_Archive/Harpoons_Harpooning_Explosive_Whaling.html">explosive harpoon</a>, which killed whales more efficiently than hand-thrown versions, and the <a href="https://www.cnrs-scrn.org/northern_mariner/vol08/nm_8_1_21-37.pdf">stern slipway</a>, which allowed whale carcasses to be processed on board ships. Along with diesel engines and steel hulls, these technologies enabled whalers to target previously untouched species in once-inaccesible locations, such as the Antarctic. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478804/original/file-20220811-26-v2yx47.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Large metal vessels on a stony beach" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478804/original/file-20220811-26-v2yx47.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478804/original/file-20220811-26-v2yx47.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478804/original/file-20220811-26-v2yx47.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478804/original/file-20220811-26-v2yx47.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478804/original/file-20220811-26-v2yx47.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478804/original/file-20220811-26-v2yx47.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478804/original/file-20220811-26-v2yx47.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">These cookers and boilers at Whalers Bay, Deception Island, Antarctica, were used to boil down whales’ skin and blubber, extracting their oil, from 1912 to 1931.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://flic.kr/p/2ngFpzv">David Stanley/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Late to the party, late to leave</h2>
<p>As mechanized whaling gained force in the 1920s and ‘30s, Norwegian, British and Japanese whalers cut through populations of blue, fin and humpback whales on a scale that is hard to believe today. In what scientists once thought was the peak catch year, 1937, <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276844456_Emptying_the_Oceans_A_Summary_of_Industrial_Whaling_Catches_in_the_20th_Century">over 63,000 large whales were killed and processed</a>. </p>
<p>World War II briefly suspended this slaughter, which many governments were starting to realize threatened the survival of some whale species. In 1946, whalers, statesmen and scientists created the <a href="https://iwc.int/commission/history-and-purpose">International Whaling Commission</a> in hopes of heading off a return to disastrous prewar levels of whaling. </p>
<p>That same year, the USSR joined the IWC and took control over a former Nazi whaleship, which it renamed the Slava, or Glory. No one suspected the central role the country would play in the most disastrous two decades of whales’ long history on Earth. </p>
<h2>The madness of modern whaling</h2>
<p>Despite the IWC’s best intentions, postwar catches rose quickly. By the mid-1950s, even longtime whalers had to admit that big whales were becoming too scarce for their industries to be profitable. All nations except Japan began to ponder the end of whaling.</p>
<p>It thus came as a shock when the Soviet Union announced in 1956 that it planned to build seven new “<a href="https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/18142832?downloadScope=page">floating factories</a>” – gigantic industrial processing ships, accompanied by fleets of smaller “<a href="https://www.coolantarctica.com/gallery/whales_whaling/0049.php">catcher” boats</a> that would scour the oceans for whales. </p>
<p>Soviet whale scientists were as stunned as observers elsewhere. These biologists and oceanographers had been watching the decline from ships and from their labs in the Fisheries Ministry and Academy of Sciences since the 1930s.</p>
<p>Instead of supporting the fleet expansion, they argued forcefully that whales stood on the brink of extinction, and whaling should <a href="https://muse.jhu.edu/article/847804">decrease radically, not expand</a>. This was how the Soviet planned economy was meant to work: Science, not profit, would help guide economic decisions, letting planners know how much could be extracted from the natural world and when to stop.</p>
<p>But Soviet officials were determined to finally catch whales on a large scale, as Western nations had done for so long. The Fisheries Ministry ignored its scientists’ recommendations and built five of the seven planned floating factories over the next decade. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478795/original/file-20220811-24-z8evm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man reclines on a beach inside the upper jaw of a whale, lined with baleen plates." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478795/original/file-20220811-24-z8evm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478795/original/file-20220811-24-z8evm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478795/original/file-20220811-24-z8evm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478795/original/file-20220811-24-z8evm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478795/original/file-20220811-24-z8evm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478795/original/file-20220811-24-z8evm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478795/original/file-20220811-24-z8evm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A Soviet harpooner poses inside the jaw of a baleen whale in 1965 at an unspecified location.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/soviet-harpooner-whaling-1965-news-photo/1177015343">Touring Club Italiano/Marka/Universal Images Group via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>By the 1960s, the Soviet Union was the world’s largest whaling nation. Whalers such as the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1965/07/22/archives/popular-soviet-whaler-denounced-as-a-tyrant-captain-is-accused-of.html">legendary captain Aleksei Solyanik</a> were celebrated as superstars, comparable to astronauts like Yuri Gagarin.</p>
<p>But the scientists had been right: Many whales species were nearly gone. To produce large catches, Solyanik and other captains decided to ignore international quotas and secretly targeted the most endangered whale species, including blue, humpback and fin whales in the Antarctic and the North Pacific. </p>
<p>In 1961, for example, Soviet fleets killed 9,619 rare humpbacks south of New Zealand, while <a href="https://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/pdf-content/mfr761-21.pdf">reporting only 302 to the IWC</a>. This was only a portion of their global catch, which the Soviet Union continued to underreport for years. Driven by <a href="https://psmag.com/social-justice/the-senseless-environment-crime-of-the-20th-century-russia-whaling-67774">Moscow’s demands for ever-increasing production</a>, whalers worked at reckless speed, wasting much of the fat and meat taken from the dead whales. It is doubtful the industry was ever profitable. </p>
<p>Thanks to Soviet scientists who preserved some records of these illegal kills and to subsequent work by other scholars, it now appears likely that the Soviet Union killed around 550,000 whales after World War II while <a href="https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Too-Much-Is-Never-Enough%3A-The-Cautionary-Tale-of-Ivashchenko-Clapham/2f47ecbcdc3aec60ca3442baff6ed425a06d1872">reporting only 360,000</a>. We now know that global whale harvesting peaked in 1964, not 1937, with a total of 91,783 whales killed – about 40% by Soviet whalers. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZCR46bn6Txo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">In this 1976 news video, Greenpeace activists confront a Soviet whaling ship on the high seas. NOTE: Contains footage that some viewers may find disturbing.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Not quite extinct</h2>
<p>By the 1970s, populations of large whales had dwindled to insignificance. Many observers were sure extinction was inevitable. But momentum for whale conservation was growing. </p>
<p>The U.S. <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species-directory/threatened-endangered">listed blue, fin, sei, sperm</a> and <a href="https://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=specialstatus.fedsummary&species=humpbackwhale">humpback whales</a> under the law that preceded the Endangered Species Act in 1970, then continued to protect them under that law, enacted in 1973. Whales also received protection in U.S. waters under the <a href="https://www.marinemammalcenter.org/marine-mammal-protection-act">1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act</a>.</p>
<p>Thanks to pressure from environmentalists and its own citizens, the Soviet Union ended its whaling industry in 1987. The country accepted a global moratorium on commercial whaling, which remains in force today with only <a href="https://iwc.int/management-and-conservation/whaling/commercial">three holdouts: Norway, Iceland and Japan</a>.</p>
<p>Whale numbers almost immediately began to rebound. Humpback whales were especially successful, but populations of bowhead, fin and sperm whales also expanded in the near absence of commercial whaling. However, some species, notably North Atlantic right whales, remain <a href="https://iucn-csg.org/status-of-the-worlds-cetaceans/">endangered or critically endangered</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478803/original/file-20220811-22-u7l2ly.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Graphic showing number of whale calves born yearly 2007-2022." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478803/original/file-20220811-22-u7l2ly.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/478803/original/file-20220811-22-u7l2ly.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478803/original/file-20220811-22-u7l2ly.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478803/original/file-20220811-22-u7l2ly.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478803/original/file-20220811-22-u7l2ly.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478803/original/file-20220811-22-u7l2ly.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/478803/original/file-20220811-22-u7l2ly.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">North Atlantic right whales are critically endangered, with a population estimated at less than 368 animals.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2022-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event">NOAA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In one of the greatest conservation successes, Eastern Pacific gray whales are today estimated to have returned to pre-exploitation abundance, and may actually be reaching the limits of what their <a href="https://blogs.oregonstate.edu/gemmlab/2019/06/04/current-gray-whale-die-off-a-concern-or-simply-the-circle-of-life/">primary foraging grounds in the Bering Sea can support</a>. And in 2018 and 2019, German scientists and researchers from the BBC observed and filmed fin whales feeding around the Antarctic peninsula in vast pods that recalled the way the ocean must have looked <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13798-7">before the 20th century</a>. </p>
<p>Thanks to the Russian scientists who opposed their country’s disastrous whaling expansion and kept its records, we know how many whales were lost in the 20th century. That information can also help scientists, governments and conservationists judge whales’ remarkable but far from complete recovery.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/186709/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ryan Jones receives funding from Rachel Carson Center for Environment and Society. </span></em></p>
The Soviet Union was a latecomer to industrial whaling, but it slaughtered whales by the thousands once it started and radically under-reported its take to international monitors.
Ryan Jones, Associate Professor of History, University of Oregon
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/157232
2021-03-31T19:00:02Z
2021-03-31T19:00:02Z
Humpback whales may have bounced back from near-extinction, but it’s too soon to declare them safe
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392446/original/file-20210330-25-um6kv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=24%2C48%2C5339%2C2967&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The resurgence in humpback whale populations over the past five decades is hailed as one of the great <a href="https://time.com/5837350/humpback-whales-recovery-hope-planet/">success stories</a> of global conservation. And right now, the federal Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/consultations/99d5d4af-5e8b-427d-a948-0011a79ae83c/files/consultation-document-delisting-megaptera-novaeangliae.pdf">is considering</a> removing the species from Australia’s <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species">threatened list</a>. </p>
<p>But humpback whales face new and emerging threats, including climate change. Surveying whales is notoriously hard, and the government has not announced monitoring plans to ensure humpback populations remain strong after delisting. We need a plan to keep them safe. </p>
<p>Australia’s whale season is about to begin. Each year between May and November, the mammals migrate north along Australia’s coastline from their feeding grounds in Antarctica to warmer waters. There, they breed before returning south.</p>
<p>So now’s a good time to take a closer look at the status of this iconic, charismatic species.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392448/original/file-20210330-23-1h0dt45.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A pod of humpback whales lunge feeding." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392448/original/file-20210330-23-1h0dt45.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392448/original/file-20210330-23-1h0dt45.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392448/original/file-20210330-23-1h0dt45.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392448/original/file-20210330-23-1h0dt45.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392448/original/file-20210330-23-1h0dt45.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392448/original/file-20210330-23-1h0dt45.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392448/original/file-20210330-23-1h0dt45.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The resurgence of humpback whales is one of conservation’s greatest success stories.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A host of threats</h2>
<p>Humpback whales live in <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/humpback-whale">every ocean</a> in the world, and have one of the longest migrations of any mammal.</p>
<p>Humpback whale numbers dwindled as a result of commercial whaling, which in Australia <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/marine/marine-species/cetaceans/whaling">began</a> in the late 18th Century. Whaling and the export of whale products was <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/marine/publications/humpback-whales-eastern-australia">Australia’s first</a> primary industry. Between 1949 and 1962 Australia’s whalers killed about 8,300 humpback whales off the east coast, until only a few hundred were left. </p>
<p>The International Whaling Commission banned humpback whaling in the Southern Hemisphere in 1963. By then, humpback populations had fallen to about 5% of pre-whaling numbers. In the years since, some <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/marine/publications/humpback-whales-eastern-australia">whaling</a> continued, but has now largely ceased.</p>
<p>Today humpback whales face new threats. <a href="https://iwc.int/humpback-whale">These include</a>:</p>
<ul>
<li>underwater noise which interferes with whale communication</li>
<li>pollution</li>
<li>vehicle collisions</li>
<li>getting caught in fishing gear</li>
<li>over-harvesting prey such as krill</li>
<li>marine debris</li>
<li>habitat degradation</li>
<li>climate change. </li>
</ul>
<p>In particular, the effects of climate change – such as warming waters, shifting currents and ocean acidification – <a href="https://abdn.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/potential-effects-of-climate-change-on-marine-mammals">may affect</a> the availability of prey that humpback whales need to survive.</p>
<p>Combined, these worsening threats <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-climate-change-is-reducing-numbers-of-humpback-whale-calves-in-the-north-west-atlantic-153589">could</a> disrupt humpback whales’ recent resurgence. Indeed, under one scenario, <a href="https://esj-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/1438-390X.1014">scientists predict</a> the increase Australia’s humpback numbers could stall — or worse, start declining – in the next five to ten years.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-threatens-antarctic-krill-and-the-sea-life-that-depends-on-it-138436">Climate change threatens Antarctic krill and the sea life that depends on it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392445/original/file-20210330-23-1vce7cr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A humpback whale calf caught in a fishing net." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392445/original/file-20210330-23-1vce7cr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392445/original/file-20210330-23-1vce7cr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392445/original/file-20210330-23-1vce7cr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392445/original/file-20210330-23-1vce7cr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392445/original/file-20210330-23-1vce7cr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392445/original/file-20210330-23-1vce7cr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392445/original/file-20210330-23-1vce7cr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A humpback whale calf caught in a fishing net.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">SeaPix</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The humpback whales’ plight</h2>
<p>According to the federal government’s <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/consultations/99d5d4af-5e8b-427d-a948-0011a79ae83c/files/consultation-document-delisting-megaptera-novaeangliae.pdf">delisting assessment</a>, humpback whales’ strong recovery suggests current threats are not a risk to the population. But this assessment has shortcomings.</p>
<p>It states humpback whales on Australia’s east and west coast have reached, or are exceeding, the original population size – increasing by 10-11% a year over the past decade or longer. </p>
<p>But this information is based on models using data collected prior 2010 for Australia’s west coast, and prior to 2015 for the east coast. This data isn’t readily available to the public and does not include recent population trends.</p>
<p>The predicted population growth from these models doesn’t account for current and future impacts from major threats, including climate change. This is despite recent research and observations suggesting changes in the humpback population.</p>
<p>For example, 2019 research showed potential <a href="https://www.scimex.org/newsfeed/warmer,-shallow-gc-waters-becoming-calving-habitat-for-humpbacks">shifts</a> in calving locations, with newborn humpback whales now frequently spotted outside Australian tropical waters. This — along with the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-09/whales-2019-season-begins-early-off-port-macquarie/10979550">early arrival</a> of migrating humpback whales in Australia in the past years — may be a first sign of <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-23/early-humpback-sighting-sounds-alarm-for-scientist/13169534">changes</a> in breeding and migration habits. </p>
<p>It’s also important to compare humpback whale populations in Australia with those elsewhere, such as in the North Pacific. There, <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mms.12665">calving rates are declining</a>, and whale <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ddi.12867">abundance and distribution</a> is showing marked shifts. The risk of entanglements with fishing gear is <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/climate-crisis-humpback-whale-entanglements-ocean-heatwave-california-a9304571.html">also rising</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-climate-change-is-reducing-numbers-of-humpback-whale-calves-in-the-north-west-atlantic-153589">How climate change is reducing numbers of humpback whale calves in the north-west Atlantic</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392449/original/file-20210330-13-1nciln5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A whale tail with a fishing line caught in it" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392449/original/file-20210330-13-1nciln5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392449/original/file-20210330-13-1nciln5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392449/original/file-20210330-13-1nciln5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392449/original/file-20210330-13-1nciln5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392449/original/file-20210330-13-1nciln5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=713&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392449/original/file-20210330-13-1nciln5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=713&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392449/original/file-20210330-13-1nciln5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=713&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Whales can get caught in fishing gear.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Todd Burrows</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The problem with counting whales</h2>
<p>The pre-whaling population size of humpback whales on the east and west coast of Australia is thought to be between 40,000 and 60,000. But information is limited and the actual number may have been much higher </p>
<p>Today, the estimated numbers from population models are similar: roughly 28,000 on the east cost and up to 30,000 on the west coast. But counting humpback whales accurately is <a href="https://iwc.int/estimate">very difficult</a>. For example, on the east coast of Australia humpback whales frequently move between populations and during a census may not be attributed to their original population. </p>
<p>What’s more, conditions prior to whaling are not comparable with today’s conditions. Krill is a major food source for whales, and widespread whaling in the Southern Hemisphere caused krill numbers to increase. Research from 2019 <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.190368">suggests</a> humpback whales’ fast recovery after whaling ceased may have been due to widely available krill. </p>
<p>But krill numbers have declined or their availability has <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/feb/14/decline-in-krill-threatens-antarctic-wildlife-from-whales-to-penguins">shortened</a> in recent years due to threats such as climate change and industrial fishing.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/humpback-whales-have-been-spotted-in-a-kakadu-river-so-in-a-fight-with-a-crocodile-who-would-win-149897">Humpback whales have been spotted in a Kakadu river. So in a fight with a crocodile, who would win?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392452/original/file-20210330-21-1gei3x8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Aerial view of humpback under icy water ." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392452/original/file-20210330-21-1gei3x8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392452/original/file-20210330-21-1gei3x8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392452/original/file-20210330-21-1gei3x8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392452/original/file-20210330-21-1gei3x8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392452/original/file-20210330-21-1gei3x8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392452/original/file-20210330-21-1gei3x8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392452/original/file-20210330-21-1gei3x8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Every year humpback whales migrate from Antarctica where they feed, to breed in Australia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Proceed with caution</h2>
<p>Humpback whales off Australia’s coast will continue to have <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/consultations/99d5d4af-5e8b-427d-a948-0011a79ae83c/files/consultation-document-delisting-megaptera-novaeangliae.pdf">some protection</a> under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, even if they’re taken off the threatened species list. </p>
<p>Generally, all marine mammals are protected in Australian waters. But getting delisted means fewer resources devoted to their protection. </p>
<p>Forecasting the complex interactions of today’s threats, in order to predict tomorrow’s humpback whale populations, <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/maec.12616">is challenging</a>. A cautionary approach should therefore be taken. </p>
<p>In 2016, the US <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/listing-humpback-whale-under-endangered-species-act">delisted some</a> humpback whale populations. But before doing so, it established a <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/document/monitoring-plan-nine-distinct-population-segments-humpback-whale-megaptera">ten-year monitoring plan</a> to track population changes, threats and species abundance. </p>
<p>If Australia proceeds with the delisting, it should follow the US’ lead. Humpback whales should remain listed for another five years so a monitoring plan can be developed. Federal and state governments must invest resources into this process, and react swiftly if changes are detected. </p>
<p><em>A number of whale researchers and organisations concerned about the humpback whale delisting, including the author, prepared a detailed response to the proposal <a href="https://whalesandclimate.org/statement-in-response-to-the-proposed-delisting-of-humpback-whales-megaptera-novaeangliae-from-the-threatened-species-list-in-australia/">here</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/157232/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Olaf Meynecke receives funding from a private charitable trust. He is affiliated with the Centre for Coastal and Marine Research, Griffith University and CEO of the not-for-profit organisation Humpbacks & Highrises. </span></em></p>
Australia is considering removing humpback whales from the threatened species list after their numbers rebounded in recent decades. But the mammals face new threats.
Olaf Meynecke, Research Fellow in Marine Science, Griffith University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/151487
2021-01-01T10:24:33Z
2021-01-01T10:24:33Z
The hopeful return of polar whales
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/373261/original/file-20201207-21-1m5stmt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C9657%2C5574&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/beautiful-view-icebergs-whale-antarctica-543673003">Alexey Suloev/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The bleak history of whaling pushed many species to the brink of extinction, even in the remote waters of the north and south poles. Over 1.3 million whales were killed in just 70 years around Antarctica alone. The scale of this industrial harvest <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102011000708">completely decimated</a> many populations of large whales in <a href="https://theconversation.com/an-ocean-like-no-other-the-southern-oceans-ecological-richness-and-significance-for-global-climate-151084">the Southern Ocean</a>. But nearly 40 years after commercial whaling ended, we’re finally seeing signs that some of the most heavily-targeted species are recovering. </p>
<p>In a recent study, scientists reported that blue whales, once prized by whalers for their gargantuan size, are <a href="https://www.int-res.com/articles/esr2020/43/n043p359.pdf">increasing in number</a> in the waters surrounding the sub-Antarctic island of South Georgia, with 41 new individuals catalogued over the past nine years. South Georgia saw around <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-54994814">3,000 blue whales killed</a> each year at the hunt’s peak in the early 20th century. The waters surrounding the island are rich in the krill these whales eat, and scientists believe their return heralds a “rediscovery” of this oceanic larder by new generations.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="An aerial view of a blue whale surfacing." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/374187/original/file-20201210-20-ug446e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/374187/original/file-20201210-20-ug446e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374187/original/file-20201210-20-ug446e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374187/original/file-20201210-20-ug446e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=415&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374187/original/file-20201210-20-ug446e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374187/original/file-20201210-20-ug446e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374187/original/file-20201210-20-ug446e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Blue whales are thought to be the largest animals to ever exist.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_whale#/media/File:Anim1754_-_Flickr_-_NOAA_Photo_Library.jpg">Anim Flickr/NOAA Photo Library</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Similar signs of recovery have been documented for humpback whales around the <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180017">western Antarctic Peninsula</a>. In the far north, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-7692.2004.tb01191.x">western Arctic bowhead whales</a> appear to be <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/dec/12/bowhead-whale-arctic-recovery-scientists">approaching numbers</a> last seen in pre-whaling days, while fin and minke whales are now regularly seen <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2016.0251">in the Chukchi Sea</a> near Alaska.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/369797/original/file-20201117-13-180ibt9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/369797/original/file-20201117-13-180ibt9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369797/original/file-20201117-13-180ibt9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369797/original/file-20201117-13-180ibt9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369797/original/file-20201117-13-180ibt9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369797/original/file-20201117-13-180ibt9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/369797/original/file-20201117-13-180ibt9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong><em>This story is part of <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/oceans-21-96784">Oceans 21</a></em></strong>
<br><em>Our series on the global ocean opened with <a href="https://oceans21.netlify.app/">five in depth profiles</a>. Look out for new articles on the state of our oceans in the lead up to the UN’s next climate conference, COP26. The series is brought to you by The Conversation’s international network.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>With the whaling industry gone, polar seas are among the best places for these ocean giants to re-establish their populations. Their habitats here are still relatively pristine and, for the moment, contain fairly stable food supplies. <a href="https://theconversation.com/arctic-ocean-climate-change-is-flooding-the-remote-north-with-light-and-new-species-150157">The Arctic</a> still hosts subsistence harvests by indigenous communities, though these hunts are carefully managed.</p>
<p>The 1984 suspension of commercial whaling prevented the extinction of large whales in polar waters, but it cannot protect them from the new pressures which will emerge as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.02.021">global warming</a> reshapes these regions. So what do these rapid changes mean for the still fragile recoveries of polar whale species?</p>
<h2>Let’s not blow it</h2>
<p>Over the next few decades, whales at the poles will face several new sources of stress, from warming waters disrupting their food supply to pollution and commercial fishing. With less sea ice and longer ice-free periods in the summer, easier access to the Arctic and Southern oceans and their resources is tempting many industries to expand or establish themselves in these remote waters. Vessel traffic, particularly <a href="https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/industry-and-energy/2020/07/ships-moving-arctic-sea-ice-level-reaches-record-low">in the Arctic</a>, is increasing, and <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/115/29/7617">whales</a> are among the <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2019.00647/full">most vulnerable</a> to the increasing noise and the potentially lethal threat of collision.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A pod of narwhals, with one tusk exposed, swimming together." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/374190/original/file-20201210-15-16qaik0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/374190/original/file-20201210-15-16qaik0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374190/original/file-20201210-15-16qaik0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374190/original/file-20201210-15-16qaik0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374190/original/file-20201210-15-16qaik0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374190/original/file-20201210-15-16qaik0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374190/original/file-20201210-15-16qaik0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Narwhals are an Arctic species that is particularly vulnerable to boat traffic.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narwhal#/media/File:Pod_Monodon_monoceros.jpg">Dr. Kristin Laidre/NOAA Photo Library</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We’ve learned how to minimise the impacts of human activity on whales in busier waters outside of the Arctic and Antarctic. As part of an ongoing research project funded by the European Commission, myself and colleagues are trying to apply those lessons in the Arctic, to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.03.042">help protect whales</a> from the growing presence of shipping.</p>
<p>We know that slowing vessels down reduces the likelihood of fatal collisions <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01329.x">with whales</a>, and it has the added benefit of reducing <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2019.00344/full">how much noise the ships produce</a>. Much like the speed restrictions planners place in busy town centres to reduce the risk of cars hitting pedestrians, we can create slow-down areas for ships in locations we know are used by whales. </p>
<p>The challenge in the Arctic is finding where such measures will be most effective, where they are safe to be implemented (ice already makes sailing in the Arctic dangerous) and how we can ensure such measures are carried out when people aren’t around to easily monitor compliance.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two polar bears eat a seal on sea ice with a ship in the background." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/374193/original/file-20201210-13-5xx8b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/374193/original/file-20201210-13-5xx8b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374193/original/file-20201210-13-5xx8b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374193/original/file-20201210-13-5xx8b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374193/original/file-20201210-13-5xx8b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374193/original/file-20201210-13-5xx8b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/374193/original/file-20201210-13-5xx8b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Arctic isn’t as isolated and ice-bound as it once was.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/pair-polar-bears-bloody-killed-seal-540005638">Ondrej Prosicky/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One source of stress that we can monitor and assess quite well is the prevalence of marine noise pollution, thanks to underwater recording devices called hydrophones. Large ships produce loud, low-frequency noise that can travel far underwater. Whales rely on sound to help them navigate their dark underwater habitats, but vessel noise can prevent them communicating and foraging effectively. It’s a bit like trying to talk to your friend in a crowded restaurant. </p>
<p>But for whales, this can be more than a simple annoyance, it can be deadly: <a href="https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1365-2435.12871">one study</a> found that ambient noise increased the risk of humpback mothers and calves being separated. Research is now underway <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X17307622">in the Arctic</a> to identify areas where increasing noise from ships may be affecting whales, and where action – such as moving shipping lanes further away – might help.</p>
<p>In many cases, fascination has replaced greed in our relationship with whales. We now understand them as useful indicators of ocean health, as well as highly intelligent beings with complex cultures which we have an obligation to protect.</p>
<p>Still, it has still taken more than 40 years to get where we are, and the fact that many whale populations – including <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/mms.12648">belugas</a>, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2020.0148">bowheads</a> and some <a href="https://doi.org/10.3354/meps13329">humpbacks</a> – are still struggling, suggests we still have a way to go. Not all the species commercial whalers once hunted appear to be recovering, even with long-term protection measures. Sperm whales in <a href="https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00584">the southern hemisphere</a> and western grey whales in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58435-3">the Russian Arctic</a> are notable examples.</p>
<p>As scientists, we still have much to learn. But we know enough to understand that a far-sighted view of the needs and vulnerabilities of these beautiful creatures is necessary to preserve a future for them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/151487/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lauren McWhinnie receives funding from the European Commissions H2020 funding scheme and has recieved funding from Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Transport Canada, CHONe and MEOPAR. </span></em></p>
Whales are rediscovering their old haunts in the Arctic and Southern oceans after centuries of hunting.
Lauren McWhinnie, Assistant Professor in Marine Geography, Heriot-Watt University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/147069
2020-11-13T14:00:17Z
2020-11-13T14:00:17Z
200 years ago, people discovered Antarctica – and promptly began profiting by slaughtering some of its animals to near extinction
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363986/original/file-20201016-23-n65p2x.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C9%2C3072%2C1945&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Workmen dissecting a whale carcass in Antarctica, circa 1935</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/workmen-dissecting-a-whale-carcass-in-antarctica-news-photo/3310716">Hulton Archive via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Two hundred years ago, on Nov. 17, Connecticut ship captain <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/210532">Nathaniel Palmer spotted the Antarctic continent</a>, one of three parties to do so in 1820. Unlike explorers Edward Bransfield and Fabian von Bellingshausen, Palmer was a sealer who quickly saw economic opportunity in the rich sealing grounds on the Antarctic Peninsula.</p>
<p>In the two centuries since, Antarctica has seen a range of commercial, scientific and diplomatic developments. While <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/frozen-empires-9780190249144?cc=us&lang=en&">some countries attempted to claim territory on the continent</a> in the first half of the 20th century, today the region is governed through the international <a href="https://www.ats.aq/index_e.html">Antarctic Treaty System</a>. </p>
<p>Although the treaty claims to govern Antarctica in the interests of all “mankind,” some countries have gained greater benefits from the region than others. While mining is currently banned under the Antarctic Treaty and the days of sealing and whaling are over, Antarctica’s marine living resources are still being exploited to this day.</p>
<h2>Fur and blubber</h2>
<p>Palmer was followed by a rush of other sealing ships, mostly from the United States and Britain, that methodically killed fur seals along Antarctic beaches, <a href="https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000684110">swiftly taking populations to the brink of extinction</a>. Seal fur was used for clothing in the 18th and 19th centuries in many parts of the world and was an important part of <a href="https://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=27054">U.S. and European trade with China</a> in the 19th century.</p>
<p>Fur sealing had a real boom-and-bust quality. Once a region was picked over, the sealers would move to more fruitful grounds. Before 1833, at least <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/Sealing_in_the_Southern_Oceans_1788_1833.html?id=kkyfuAAACAAJ">7 million fur seals were killed in the Antarctic and sub-Antarctic</a>. As early as 1829, British naturalist James Eights lamented the loss of the fur seal on the Antarctic peninsula: “<a href="https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000684110">This beautiful little animal was once most numerous here</a>.” </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363782/original/file-20201015-17-1fdyso8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Watercolor painting depicting an Antarctic landscape with a man in the foreground swinging an ax into the bloody carcass of a seal." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363782/original/file-20201015-17-1fdyso8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363782/original/file-20201015-17-1fdyso8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=446&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363782/original/file-20201015-17-1fdyso8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=446&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363782/original/file-20201015-17-1fdyso8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=446&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363782/original/file-20201015-17-1fdyso8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363782/original/file-20201015-17-1fdyso8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363782/original/file-20201015-17-1fdyso8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">‘The Antarctic Butcher’ painted by Standish Backus, 1956.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.history.navy.mil/our-collections/art/exhibits/exploration-and-technology/antarctica-operation-deep-freeze-i-1955-56/life-in-camp/the-antarctic-butcher.html">U.S. Naval Art Collection</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Elephant seals were also hunted, but for their blubber, which could be converted into oil. It was not difficult for hunters to drive them to the beaches, lance them through the heart (or, later, shoot them in the skull), drain their blood and remove their blubber. “We left the dead things, raw and meaty, lying on the beach,” <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/South_Latitude.html?id=a-Nzlo95OrsC">according to one sealer</a>. The <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Sealing_in_the_Southern_Oceans_1788_1833/kkyfuAAACAAJ?hl=en">birds would pick the skeletons clean within days</a>. </p>
<p>Sealing rapidly declined in the 1960s, owing to a mix of evolving cultural sentiments and changing availability of other materials, such as plastics, that could be made into warm synthetic clothing and petroleum-based lubricants. </p>
<p>The broadcast of <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/archives/entry/new-rules-to-protect-seals">footage showing Canadian sealing in the early 1960s</a> scandalized North American and European citizens and <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=oCSQDwAAQBAJ&source=gbs_navlinks_s">prompted a quick shift in attitudes toward sealing</a>. The Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals was signed in 1972, regulating the large-scale slaughter of seals for all nations in the region. Today, the population of <a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/2058/66993062">fur seals has rebounded</a>, with a <a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/2058/66993062#population">colony of over 5 million</a> on South Georgia alone, though numbers have declined since 2000. Elephant seals, too, have largely rebounded, with an <a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/13583/45227247">estimated stable population of 650,000</a> since the mid-1990s. </p>
<h2>Blood-red water</h2>
<p>The whaling grounds off Antarctica were so rich they drew fleets from many nations. First came Norwegian and British companies, later to be joined by others from Germany, Russia, the Netherlands and Japan. Whaling had occurred in the Southern Ocean in the 19th century, but it wasn’t until the first half of the 20th century that <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/The_History_of_Modern_Whaling.html?id=-miE3r5DgPUC">whales were hunted to near extinction there</a>. </p>
<p>In the 19th century, whale oil was used primarily for lamp fuel. But after 1910, <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/The_History_of_Modern_Whaling.html?id=-miE3r5DgPUC">new uses were found for the oil</a>, including <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/The_History_of_Modern_Whaling.html?id=-miE3r5DgPUC">as industrial lubricants and edible fats</a>. </p>
<p>Whaling became extremely lucrative for a small group of companies, including <a href="https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/what-is-margarine-made-of">Unilever, whose early fortunes were built from margarine made with whale oil</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363989/original/file-20201016-13-1hrvkq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Three whale carcasses in various stages of dismemberment are on the deck of a large ship with men working on them." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363989/original/file-20201016-13-1hrvkq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/363989/original/file-20201016-13-1hrvkq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=735&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363989/original/file-20201016-13-1hrvkq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=735&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363989/original/file-20201016-13-1hrvkq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=735&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363989/original/file-20201016-13-1hrvkq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=924&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363989/original/file-20201016-13-1hrvkq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=924&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/363989/original/file-20201016-13-1hrvkq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=924&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Aboard a Japanese whaling ship near Antarctica, 1962.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/south-pole-a-japanese-whaling-1962-news-photo/1182685696">Marka/Universal Images Group via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>At first, whales killed at sea had to be brought to a shore station to be processed. <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/Great_Waters.html?id=lyMGwgEACAAJ">In 1925, an observer wrote</a>, “What an appalling stench it is…The water in which the whales float, and on which we too are riding, is blood red.” From the late 1920s on, these <a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/S/bo9845648.html">shore stations were replaced by pelagic whaling stations</a>, where whales were processed more efficiently on factory ships at sea.</p>
<p>In 1946, some international efforts were made to protect whales. The goal of the <a href="https://archive.iwc.int/pages/view.php?ref=3607&k=">International Whaling Commission</a> created that year was “to provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry.” </p>
<p>But, again in the 1960s, public attitudes toward whales, like seals, began to change when environmentalists revealed they were highly intelligent, sociable creatures that <a href="https://www.npr.org/2014/12/26/373303726/recordings-that-made-waves-the-songs-that-saved-the-whales">sang in the ocean depths</a>. Most nations ceased whale hunting in the Antarctic by the end of the 1960s – because of this consciousness and also because there were inexpensive alternatives to whale products. </p>
<h2>Fishing</h2>
<p>Antarctica’s rich marine life continues to be exploited today. <a href="https://www.ccamlr.org/en/organisation/fishing-ccamlr">Krill and toothfish began to be fished in the 1970s</a>. </p>
<p>Krill, <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/invertebrates/group/krill/">a small shrimp-like crustacean</a>, is used in nutritional supplements and pet foods. <a href="https://www.ccamlr.org/en/fisheries/krill-%E2%80%93-biology-ecology-and-fishing">Norway, China, South Korea and Chile are its biggest harvesters</a>. Toothfish, which has been marketed as Chilean sea bass, is on menus worldwide. </p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>Since 1982, the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources has managed these fisheries with the overriding goal of maintaining the whole ecosystem. Whales, seals, birds and other fish rely on krill, making them essential to the Antarctic marine ecosystem. </p>
<p>While krill and toothfish are currently both plentiful in the Antarctic, it is unclear how much the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05372-x">reduction of sea ice and the changing migration patterns of predators</a> who feed on these species are affecting their populations.</p>
<p>Historically and currently, only a small number of people have profited from Antarctica’s living resources, at the great expense of animal populations. Even if sustainable harvesting is possible now, climate change is rapidly undermining Antarctic’s ecological stability. </p>
<p>While major <a href="https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/victories/creating-the-world-park-antarctica/">environmental campaigns try to raise awareness</a> of Antarctica’s fragility, most consumers of its products likely do not even know their provenance. Whale and seal populations continue to recover from past overexploitation, but the future impacts of current fishing practices and climate change are uncertain.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/147069/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alessandro Antonello receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniella McCahey does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
For 200 years, a small number of countries have exploited the marine wildlife of Antarctica, often with devastating impact on their populations.
Daniella McCahey, Assistant Professor of History, Texas Tech University
Alessandro Antonello, Senior Research Fellow in History, Flinders University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/127504
2020-01-21T13:49:32Z
2020-01-21T13:49:32Z
Iceland didn’t hunt any whales in 2019 – and public appetite for whale meat is fading
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306486/original/file-20191212-85422-8m3gon.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C6%2C2176%2C1426&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Whale watching (here, off Húsavík, Iceland) may be better for the local economy than whale hunting. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:North_Sailing_-_H%C3%BAsav%C3%ADk_Whale_Watching,_H%C3%BAsav%C3%ADk,_Iceland_(Unsplash).jpg">Davide Cantelli/Wikimedia </a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>One of the most important global conservation events of the past year was something that didn’t happen. For the first time since 2002, Iceland – one of just three countries that still allow commercial whaling – didn’t hunt any whales, even though its government had approved whaling permits in early 2019.</p>
<p>Many people may think of whaling as a 19th-century industry in which men threw harpoons at their quarry by hand. But humans are still killing whales today in other ways. Thousands of whales are struck by ships, <a href="https://theconversation.com/high-tech-fishing-gear-could-help-save-critically-endangered-right-whales-115974">entangled in fishing lines</a>, and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/science/oceans-whales-noise-offshore-drilling.html">harmed by ocean noise</a> every year.</p>
<p>However, most nations support a commercial whaling ban that the <a href="https://iwc.int/home">International Whaling Commission</a>, a global body charged with whale management, imposed in 1986 to prevent these creatures from being hunted to extinction. Iceland, Norway and Japan have long been exceptions to this <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/07/norway-boosts-whaling-quota-international-opposition">international consensus</a>.</p>
<p>I study <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=yFzb2EUAAAAJ&hl=en%20%22%22">marine ecology and conservation</a> and spent the 2018-19 academic year on a Fulbright fellowship in Iceland. It is encouraging to see countries come to realize that whales are worth more alive than dead – for their spiritual value, their role in tourism, and the ecological services that they provide. As more Icelanders adopt this view, it will be good news for ocean conservation.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mx4M-AsNpOQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">As recently as 2018, Iceland was hunting whales in defiance of international criticism.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The ecological value of large marine mammals</h2>
<p>For years, ecological studies of whales focused on how much fish they ate or krill they consumed, which represented costs to fisheries. Starting around 10 years ago, my colleagues and I took a fresh look at <a href="https://doi.org/10.1890/130220">whales’ ecological role in the ocean</a>.</p>
<p>Whales often dive deep to feed, coming to the surface to breathe, rest, digest – and poop. Their nutrient-rich fecal plumes provide nitrogen, iron and phosphorous to algae at the surface, which increases productivity in areas where whales feed. More whales mean more plankton and more fish.</p>
<p>Whales also play a role in the carbon cycle. They are the largest creatures on Earth, and when they die their carcasses often sink to the deep sea. These events, known as whale falls, provide habitat for at least a hundred species that depend on the bones and nutrients. They also transfer carbon to the deep ocean, where it remains sequestered for <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012444">hundreds of years</a>.</p>
<p>Whales are economically valuable, but watching them brings in more money than killing them. “Humpbacks are one of the most commercially important marine species in Iceland,” a whale-watching guide told me one morning off the coast of Akureyri. Whale-watching income <a href="http://www.joeroman.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Malinauskaite-2020-Willingness-to-pay-for-expansion-of.pdf">far outweighs the income from hunting</a> fin and minke whales. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fFtcK1cK1ro?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Octopus, fish and other underwater scavengers feeding on the carcass of a dead whale in California’s Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The end of Icelandic whaling?</h2>
<p>For years after the international moratorium on whaling was adopted in 1986, only Norway allowed commercial whaling. Japan continued hunting in the Antarctic under the guise of “scientific whaling,” which many whale biologists considered <a href="https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053%5B0210:WAS%5D2.0.CO;2">unnecessary and egregious</a>.</p>
<p>Iceland also allowed a research hunt in the 1980s, with much of the meat sold to Japan, but stopped whaling under international pressure in the 1990s. It resumed commercial hunting in 2002, with strong domestic support. Iceland was ruled by Norway and then Denmark until 1944. As a result, Icelanders often chafe under external pressure. Many saw foreign protests against whaling as a threat to their national identity, and local media coverage was distinctly pro-whaling.</p>
<p>This view started to shift around 2014, when European governments refused to allow the transport of whale meat harvested by Icelandic whalers through their ports, en route to <a href="https://phys.org/news/2014-05-japan-imports-tonnes-whale-meat.html">commercial buyers in Japan</a>. Many European countries <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/MEMO_14_529">opposed Icelandic whaling</a> and were unwilling to facilitate this trade. Whalers no longer looked so invincible, and Icelandic media started covering both sides of the debate.</p>
<p>In May 2019, Hvalur – the whaling business owned by Kristján Loftsson, Iceland’s most vocal and controversial whaler – announced that it wouldn’t hunt fin whales, which are <a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/2478/50349982">internationally classified as vulnerable</a>, this year, citing a need for ship repairs and declining demand in Japan. In June, Gunnar Bergmann Jónsson, owner of a smaller outfit, announced that he <a href="https://www.icelandreview.com/news/no-whaling-this-summer/">wouldn’t go whaling</a> either. These decisions meant that the hunt was off.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306483/original/file-20191212-85412-1cb05yo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306483/original/file-20191212-85412-1cb05yo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/306483/original/file-20191212-85412-1cb05yo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=364&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306483/original/file-20191212-85412-1cb05yo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=364&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306483/original/file-20191212-85412-1cb05yo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=364&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306483/original/file-20191212-85412-1cb05yo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306483/original/file-20191212-85412-1cb05yo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/306483/original/file-20191212-85412-1cb05yo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Whalers haul a dead whale onto their boat off the west coast of Iceland in 2003.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Associated-Press-PL-XSE-ISL-ISLAND-WALFANG/c2431191d1e0da11af9f0014c2589dfb/39/0">AP Photo Adam Butler</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>During my year in Iceland, I met for coffee every couple of weeks with Sigursteinn Másson, program leader for the local whale-watching association <a href="https://icewhale.is/">IceWhale</a> and representative of the <a href="https://www.ifaw.org/">International Fund for Animal Welfare</a>. At times he seemed animated about the prospect that no whaling permits would be allotted. At others, he looked gloomy because whalers and their allies in the Icelandic government had co-opted the conversation. </p>
<p>“I worked on gay rights in Iceland, which was opposed by the church, and mental health for ten years,” he told me. “They were peanuts compared to the whaling issue.”</p>
<p>At first, both companies insisted that they would start whaling again in 2020. But Jónsson’s outfit no longer plans to hunt minkes, and Másson doubts that whaling will continue. “Nobody is encouraging them anymore – or interested,” he told me last summer.</p>
<p>Now trade is getting even tougher. In 2018 Japan announced that it would leave the International Whaling Commission, stop its controversial Antarctic whaling program and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/01/business/japan-commercial-whaling.html">focus on hunting whales in its coastal waters</a>, reducing the demand for Icelandic whale meat.</p>
<p>Tourist behavior in Iceland is also changing. For years, tourists would go out whale watching, then order grilled minke in restaurants. After the International Fund for Animal Welfare started targeting whale watchers in 2011 with its “<a href="https://ifaw.is/">Meet Us Don’t Eat Us</a>” campaign, the number of tourists who ate whale meat <a href="https://www.ifaw.org/people-and-ideas/opinions/we-asked-whale-expert-sigursteinn-masson-about-the-iceland-whaling-industry-heres-what-he-revealed">declined from 40% to 11%</a>. </p>
<h2>A generational shift</h2>
<p>For many Icelanders, whale meat is an occasional delicacy. Over dinner a few months ago, I met an Icelandic woman who told me she thought whale was delicious, and she didn’t see why whaling was such a big deal. How many times had she eaten whale? Once a month, once a year? “I’ve had it twice in my life.”</p>
<p>About a third of Icelanders now <a href="https://www.ifaw.org/eu/news/no-fin-whaling-in-iceland-in-2019">oppose whaling</a>. They tend to be younger urban residents. A third are neutral, and a third support whaling. Many in this last group may feel stronger about critiques of whaling than about hvalakjöt, or whale meat. Demand for hvalakjöt in grocery stores and restaurants has started to dry up.</p>
<p>Although few observers would have predicted it, whaling may end in Iceland not through denial of a permit but from lack of interest. How long until the world’s remaining commercial whalers in Japan and Norway, who face similar shifts in taste and demographics, follow a similar course?</p>
<p>[ <em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>. ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/127504/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joe Roman received funding from the Fulbright-National Science Foundation Arctic Research Scholar program.</span></em></p>
Icelandic whalers have killed more than 1,700 whales since a global ban was adopted in 1986 – up to 2019, when no hunts took place. Is Iceland quietly getting out of the business?
Joe Roman, Fellow, Gund Institute for Environment, University of Vermont
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/119573
2019-07-01T13:15:16Z
2019-07-01T13:15:16Z
Japan resumes commercial whaling – researchers on how the world should respond
<p>Japan recently left the <a href="https://iwc.int/home">International Whaling Commission (IWC)</a> and has now <a href="https://twitter.com/adamvaughan_uk/status/1145619114091847681">caught the first whale in its waters</a> since resuming commercial whaling, 33 years after a global ban came into effect. As a non-member, Japan is no longer bound by the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) – the rules that the IWC has used to manage whaling since 1946.</p>
<p>The IWC’s moratorium on commercial whaling has broadly been a success – whale populations have increased where whaling was the primary threat. The <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=38">humpback whale</a> is one example of successful recovery, but species such as the northern right whale have never recovered from centuries of whaling and <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/06/1-north-atlantic-right-whales-have-died-month/592840/">are in critically low numbers</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/g20-japan-environmentalists-commercial-whaling-1.5193390">Outrage and despair</a> greeted Japan’s decision to relaunch commercial whaling in its waters, although the conservation status of many species may be unaffected. Still, Japan’s exit from the IWC is a worrying message to the international community at a time when collaboration on environmental issues is sorely needed.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281908/original/file-20190630-94712-t6la1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281908/original/file-20190630-94712-t6la1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281908/original/file-20190630-94712-t6la1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281908/original/file-20190630-94712-t6la1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281908/original/file-20190630-94712-t6la1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281908/original/file-20190630-94712-t6la1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281908/original/file-20190630-94712-t6la1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Protesters march in London to demonstrate against Japan’s decision to resume commercial whaling, January 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/london-uk-january-26-2019-placrd-1295534266?src=a8OHyYaTdVsJCKCXMbwnNw-1-5&studio=1">Kevin J. Frost/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why has Japan left the IWC?</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/09/15/national/science-health/japan-brink-leaving-international-whaling-commission-commercial-whaling-proposal-blocked/">Japan introduced a proposal at the IWC</a> in 2018 which would allow it to restart commercial whaling. This was voted down – the <a href="https://phys.org/news/2018-09-iwc-brazil-whales.html">proposal</a> that was approved in its place supported a shift in the commission’s goal towards banning all commercial whaling in perpetuity. </p>
<p>A permanent commercial whaling ban might sound like an ordinary step, but the <a href="https://iwc.int/history-and-purpose">IWC’s purpose</a> since 1946 has been “the orderly development of the whaling industry”. The IWC has gradually pivoted to focus more on conservation and other threats to whales since then, but one of its founding goals was to support the whaling industry and the people it employed. As the whaling industry has declined and attitudes towards whales have changed around the world, the IWC has changed too. Japan meanwhile has always been clear it wants to resume commercial whaling and is leaving the IWC because the moratorium was only meant to be temporary and lifted when whale populations could support whaling.</p>
<p>Japan isn’t the first country to leave the IWC because of frustration with its rules on commercial whaling. Iceland left in 1992 and <a href="https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/eur/rls/fs/10228.htm">rejoined in 2002</a> as a full member but with a reservation to the moratorium that allows it to <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-iceland-is-set-to-resume-whaling-despite-international-opposition-95642">commercially whale</a>. Norway <a href="https://iwc.int/commercial">objected to the moratorium decision in 1982</a> and so kept its right to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/07/norway-boosts-whaling-quota-international-opposition">commercially whale</a> while remaining a full IWC member. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281900/original/file-20190630-94684-1j6h7gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C6720%2C4476&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281900/original/file-20190630-94684-1j6h7gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281900/original/file-20190630-94684-1j6h7gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281900/original/file-20190630-94684-1j6h7gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281900/original/file-20190630-94684-1j6h7gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281900/original/file-20190630-94684-1j6h7gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281900/original/file-20190630-94684-1j6h7gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A common minke whale (<em>Balaenoptera acutorostrata</em>) in the Pacific Ocean.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/dwarf-minke-whale-balaenoptera-acutorostrata-underwater-1213127632?src=mHXgyIgW2uz-ujuFvQgCqw-1-2&studio=1">Aquapix/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A mixed outcome for whales</h2>
<p>For most whale species, the exit of Japan from the convention banning commercial whaling will have <a href="https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/01/why-japan-s-exit-international-whaling-treaty-may-actually-benefit-whales">few consequences</a>. Whale populations in the Southern Ocean are even likely to benefit as Japan will lose its special research permit for scientific whaling in the region by leaving the IWC. Japan mostly took Antarctic minke whales (<em>Balaenoptera bonaerensis</em>) here, but this species is not considered <a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/2480/50350661#population">endangered</a>.</p>
<p>It’s a different story for whales found within Japan’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). No longer bound by the IWC’s rules, Japan can harvest whales here under the right given by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea but the number and species it will decide to take hasn’t been announced. One vulnerable population living in Japan’s EEZ which may be affected are common minke whales (<em>Balaenoptera acutorostrata</em>), which are genetically distinct and <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2019.00247/full">possibly number fewer than 5,500</a>. It’s worrying this population hasn’t shown the same robust recovery seen among other minke whales. </p>
<p>Japan will want to prove to the world it can whale sustainably but the long-term future of whaling is uncertain. The market for whale meat in Japan peaked after World War II and is now a shadow of its former self. Although still eaten in cultural ceremonies and a few localities in northern Honshu, consumption is around <a href="https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-04-17/japan-few-people-eat-whale-meat-anymore-whaling-remains-popular">40g per capita each year</a> - about the size of a slice of ham. Whether Japan’s diminished appetite for whale meat will reduce its whaling efforts though remains to be seen.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/282011/original/file-20190701-105164-ur421n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4913%2C3096&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/282011/original/file-20190701-105164-ur421n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=379&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282011/original/file-20190701-105164-ur421n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=379&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282011/original/file-20190701-105164-ur421n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=379&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282011/original/file-20190701-105164-ur421n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=476&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282011/original/file-20190701-105164-ur421n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=476&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/282011/original/file-20190701-105164-ur421n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=476&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In the Southern Ocean, the ban on commercial whaling has helped some populations of humpback whale increase by 10% per year.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/humpback-whale-jumping-out-water-australia-776180275?src=pUPKYch_2oxMFhbTy0go2w-1-0&studio=1">Nico Faramaz/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A way forward?</h2>
<p>Research by the <a href="https://iwc.int/index.php?cID=html_16">IWC scientific committee</a> has greatly advanced our understanding of whale ecology and how to address other threats to their survival, like pollution, bycatch and climate change. Japan’s exit from the IWC doesn’t threaten the organisation’s activities and every effort should be made to continue this important research. But if the “International Whaling Commission” is to become a conservation organisation, then maybe its status as a whaling commission is outdated. </p>
<p>Countries could continue to work together on whale conservation by using the <a href="https://www.cms.int/en/legalinstrument/cms">Convention on Migratory Species</a>. This specifically targets the conservation of migratory species and their habitats, and would apply to protecting whales. In fact, there is already <a href="https://www.cms.int/en/legalinstrument/accobams">a regional agreement</a> between countries that’s focused on whale conservation.</p>
<p>Agreements made under this convention might be better able to deal with the diverse threats facing whales. A whale research programme focused on conservation – as opposed to a whaling research programme – made up of the IWC scientific committee and Japan might have fewer conflicts as their objective would be clearer.</p>
<p>Japan’s exit from the IWC is a <a href="https://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/eyes-on-environment/the_japanese_whaling_controversy_8211">complicated issue beyond just whale conservation</a> – it highlights the need for the international community to overcome disagreements. Asking why the IWC has <a href="https://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/2012/almost-saving-whales-the-ambiguity-of-success-at-the-international-whaling-commission-full-text/">succeeded and failed at different times</a> can help us improve the way we work together on global challenges as after all, whaling is only one example of the many urgent and complex environmental issues that demand a global response. How well we work together determines more than just the fate of the world’s whales.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/119573/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Bridgewater was Chairman (1995-1997) and Vice Chair (1992-1994) of the International Whaling Commission.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sui Phang does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Japan’s exit from the IWC should spur on more global cooperation on environmental issues, not less.
Sui Phang, Research Fellow in Blue Governance, University of Portsmouth
Peter Bridgewater, Adjunct Professor, University of Canberra
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/104931
2019-02-19T04:25:22Z
2019-02-19T04:25:22Z
Rock art shows early contact with US whalers on Australia’s remote northwest coast
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/256280/original/file-20190130-39344-k0qvoi.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Detail of the Connecticut Inscription, with image enhancement.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Centre for Rock Art Research and Management database</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Rock inscriptions made by crews from two North American whaleships in the early 19th century were found superimposed over earlier Aboriginal engravings in the Dampier Archipelago.</p>
<p>Details of the find in northern Western Australia are in a paper <a href="https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2018.186">published today in Antiquity</a>.</p>
<p>They provide the earliest evidence for North American whalers’ memorialising practices in Australia, and have substantial implications for maritime history.</p>
<iframe src="https://www.google.com/maps/embed?pb=!1m18!1m12!1m3!1d2691194.896564308!2d115.26099872878433!3d-21.923671441706656!2m3!1f0!2f0!3f0!3m2!1i1024!2i768!4f13.1!3m3!1m2!1s0x2bf622fb09950c71%3A0x400f6382479c990!2sDampier+Archipelago+WA+6713!5e1!3m2!1sen!2sau!4v1548827648251" width="100%" height="500" frameborder="0" style="border:0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<p>At the time, the Dampier Archipelago (Murujuga) was home to the Yaburara people. The rock art across the archipelago is testament to their artists asserting their connections to this place for millennia.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/where-art-meets-industry-protecting-the-spectacular-rock-art-of-the-burrup-peninsula-72964">Where art meets industry: protecting the spectacular rock art of the Burrup Peninsula</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>So did the whalers encounter the Yaburara? Did they engrave over earlier Aboriginal markings as an act of assertion, a realignment of a shifting political landscape? Or were they simply marking a milestone in their multi-year voyages, celebrating landfall after many months at sea?</p>
<p>The answer to all these questions is, we don’t know.</p>
<p>But these inscriptions provide a rare insight into the lives of whalers, filling a gap in our knowledge about this earliest industry on our northwestern coast.</p>
<p>Such historical inscriptions might be dismissed as graffiti. However, like other rock art, they tell important stories about our human past that cannot be gleaned from other sources.</p>
<h2>Whaling in Australia</h2>
<p>Ship-based whaling was a global phenomenon that lasted centuries. At its peak in the mid-19th century, around 900 wooden sailing ships were at sea on multi-year voyages, crewed by around 22,000 whalemen.</p>
<p>Most whaling in Australian waters was conducted by foreign vessels, and in the 19th century North American whalers dominated the globe. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/241004/original/file-20181017-41150-35kp8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/241004/original/file-20181017-41150-35kp8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/241004/original/file-20181017-41150-35kp8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=318&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/241004/original/file-20181017-41150-35kp8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=318&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/241004/original/file-20181017-41150-35kp8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=318&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/241004/original/file-20181017-41150-35kp8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/241004/original/file-20181017-41150-35kp8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/241004/original/file-20181017-41150-35kp8g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Illustration of an American whaling ship in the 19th century.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dr Kenneth McPherson, Indian Ocean Collection, WA Museum (with permission)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Whaling led to some of the earliest contacts between American, European and a range of indigenous societies in Africa, Australasia and the Pacific. </p>
<p>But early visits by foreign whalers to Australia’s northwest are poorly documented given the absence of a British colonial land-based presence in the area until the 1860s.</p>
<p>While <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/William-Dampier">explorer William Dampier</a> named the Dampier Archipelago and Rosemary Island in 1699, British naval <a href="http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/king-phillip-parker-2310">Captain Phillip Parker King</a> was the first to document encounters with the Yaburara people in 1818. His visit to the archipelago in the rainy season (February) coincided with large groups of people using the seasonally abundant resources at this time.</p>
<p>The Swan River Colony (Perth) was established in 1829, but permanent European colonisation of the northwest only began in the early 1860s with an influx of pastoralists and pearlers. </p>
<p>For the Yaburara, this colonisation was catastrophic. It culminated in the <a href="https://ictv.com.au/video/item/5475" title="VIDEO: Yaburara Flying Foam Massacre 150 Years On, 2018">Flying Foam Massacre</a> <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-16/calls-for-memorial-at-site-of-flying-foam-massacre-north-west-wa/9661006">in 1868</a> in which many Yaburara people were killed.</p>
<h2>Early whaling contact</h2>
<p>A few surviving ship logbooks record English and North American whalers on the Dampier Archipelago from 1801, but the heyday of whaling near “The Rosemary Islands” was between the 1840s and 1860s. </p>
<p>The logbooks describe American whaling ships worked together to hunt herds of humpback whales, which migrate along Australia’s northwest coastline during the winter months.</p>
<p>The ships’ crews made landfall to collect firewood and drinking water, and to post lookouts on vantage points to assist in sighting whales for the open boats to pursue.</p>
<p><a href="https://researchimpact.uwa.edu.au/research-impact-stories/murujuga-dynamics-of-the-dreaming/">Research</a> by archaeologists from the University of Western Australia working with the <a href="http://www.murujuga.org.au/">Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation</a> and industry partner <a href="https://youtu.be/cQ1efyPAlW8">Rio Tinto</a> has found some evidence of two such landfalls in inscriptions from the crew of two North American whalers – the Connecticut and the Delta. </p>
<p>The earliest of these inscriptions records that the Connecticut visited Rosemary Island on August 18 1842. At least part of this inscription was made by Jacob Anderson, identified from the Connecticut’s crew list as a 19-year-old African-American sailor. </p>
<p>Research shows this set of ships’ and people’s names was placed over an earlier set of Aboriginal <a href="https://youtu.be/ANtpNDfmeXo">grid motifs</a>. This was along a ridgeline that has millennia of evidence for the Yaburara producing rock art and raising standing stones and quarrying tool-stone elevated above this seascape.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ANtpNDfmeXo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Visualising the Connecticut inscription.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The dates and names found in the inscription correlate with port records that show the Connecticut left the town of New London in Connecticut, US, for the New Holland ground (as the waters off Australia’s northwest were known) in 1841, with Captain Daniel Crocker and a crew of 26.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255080/original/file-20190123-100273-t9jips.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255080/original/file-20190123-100273-t9jips.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255080/original/file-20190123-100273-t9jips.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255080/original/file-20190123-100273-t9jips.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255080/original/file-20190123-100273-t9jips.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255080/original/file-20190123-100273-t9jips.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=553&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255080/original/file-20190123-100273-t9jips.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=553&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255080/original/file-20190123-100273-t9jips.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=553&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Connecticut inscription, tracing by Ken Mulvaney.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Antiquity, Paterson et al 2019 (with permission)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Connecticut returned to New London on June 16 1843, with 1,800 barrels of oil, travelling via Fremantle, New Zealand and Cape Horn. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240556/original/file-20181015-165900-1x9semk.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240556/original/file-20181015-165900-1x9semk.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240556/original/file-20181015-165900-1x9semk.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240556/original/file-20181015-165900-1x9semk.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240556/original/file-20181015-165900-1x9semk.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=511&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240556/original/file-20181015-165900-1x9semk.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=642&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240556/original/file-20181015-165900-1x9semk.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=642&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240556/original/file-20181015-165900-1x9semk.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=642&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The largest of the Connecticut inscriptions showing micro-analysis of the inscription over the Aboriginal engravings.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Antiquity, Paterson et al 2019 (with permission)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Connecticut’s logbook for the voyage is missing, so without these inscriptions we would know nothing of this ship’s visit to the Dampier Archipelago.</p>
<p>On another island, another set of inscriptions record a visit to a similar vantage point by crew of the Delta on July 12 1849. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240741/original/file-20181016-165897-1xr6xt5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240741/original/file-20181016-165897-1xr6xt5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/240741/original/file-20181016-165897-1xr6xt5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240741/original/file-20181016-165897-1xr6xt5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240741/original/file-20181016-165897-1xr6xt5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240741/original/file-20181016-165897-1xr6xt5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240741/original/file-20181016-165897-1xr6xt5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/240741/original/file-20181016-165897-1xr6xt5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Details of the Delta inscriptions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Centre for Rock Art Research + Management</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Registered in Greenport, New York, the Delta made 18 global whaling voyages between 1832 and 1856. Its logbook confirms it was whaling in the Dampier Archipelago between June 2 and September 8 1849. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255079/original/file-20190123-100261-7m4s5.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255079/original/file-20190123-100261-7m4s5.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255079/original/file-20190123-100261-7m4s5.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255079/original/file-20190123-100261-7m4s5.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255079/original/file-20190123-100261-7m4s5.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255079/original/file-20190123-100261-7m4s5.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255079/original/file-20190123-100261-7m4s5.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255079/original/file-20190123-100261-7m4s5.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The voyage of the Delta as researched from Log Book entries.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Antiquity, Paterson et al 2019 (with permission)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While the log records crew members going ashore to shoot kangaroos and collect water, no mention is made of them making inscriptions or having any contact with Yaburara people.</p>
<p>Given it was the dry season, and the lack of permanent water on the islands, this lack of contact is not surprising. </p>
<p>But again, these whalers chose to make their marks on surfaces that were already marked by the Yaburara. By recording their presence at these specific historical moments, the whalers continued the long tradition of the Yaburara in interacting with and marking their maritime environment.</p>
<h2>Protecting the heritage</h2>
<p>Between 1822 and 1963, whalers killed more than 26,000 southern right whales (<em>Eubalaena australis</em>) and 40,000 humpback whales (<em>Megaptera novaengliae</em>) in Australia and New Zealand, driving populations to near-extinction.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/marine/marine-species/cetaceans/whaling">Commercial whaling in Australian waters</a> ended 40 years ago on November 21 1978, with the closure of the <a href="https://www.watoday.com.au/national/western-australia/the-day-australia-s-whaling-harpoons-stopped-for-good-20181120-p50h8o.html">Cheynes Beach Whaling Station</a> in Albany, Western Australia.</p>
<p>Today there are signs of renewal, with whale populations increasing, and Aboriginal people are reclaiming responsibility <a href="https://book.bookeasy.com/murujuga-rock-art-cultural-experience/tours/96646">for management</a> of the archipelago. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-why-the-rock-art-of-murujuga-deserves-world-heritage-status-102100">Explainer: why the rock art of Murujuga deserves World Heritage status</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There is a strong push for World Heritage Listing of Murujuga — one of the most significant concentrations for human artistic creativity on the planet, recording <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-06/tim-winton-joins-push-for-world-heritage-listing-of-rock-art/10071998">millennia of human responses</a> to the sustainable use of this productive landscape.</p>
<p>These two whaling inscriptions provide the only known archaeological insight into this earliest global resource extraction in Australia’s northwest - the whale oil industry - which began over two centuries ago. </p>
<p>They demonstrate yet again the unique capacity of Murujuga’s rock art to shed light on previously unknown details of our shared human history.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/104931/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jo McDonald receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is Lead CI on the Murujuga: Dynamics of the Dreaming ARC Linkage Project; which is administered by UWA, has Rio Tinto as an Industry Partner and Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation as a Collaborating Partner. Jo McDonald held the Rio Tinto Chair of Rock Art Studies between 2012-2017.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alistair Paterson receives funding from the Australian Research Council as an ARC Future Fellow for the fellowship 'Coastal Connections: dynamic societies of Australia's Northwest frontier' (FT150100168). He is the lead investigator on 'Collecting the West: How collections created Western Australia' (ARC Linkage Project LP160100078) and 'Shipwrecks of the Roaring Forties: A Maritime Archaeological Reassessment of some of Australia's Earliest Shipwrecks' (ARC Linkage Project LP130100137). He is a Chief Investigator on 'Murujuga: Dynamics of the Dreaming' ARC Linkage Project. Research partners include the WA Museum, British Museum, State Library of WA, Art Gallery of WA, industry (BHP, Rio Tinto), and Aboriginal communities. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ross Anderson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Etchings over much earlier Aboriginal engravings show foreign whalers made contact with Australia’s remote northwest long before colonial settlement of the area.
Jo McDonald, Director, Centre for Rock Art Research + Management, The University of Western Australia
Alistair Paterson, ARC Future Fellow, The University of Western Australia
Ross Anderson, Curator of Maritime Archaeology, Western Australian Museum
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/82899
2017-08-30T00:32:16Z
2017-08-30T00:32:16Z
Change Agents: Darren Kindleysides and Don Rothwell on how Australia briefly stopped Japanese whaling
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183557/original/file-20170828-15693-1h7ag0c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Navin75/Flickr, Australian Marine Conservation Society, ANU</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The anti-whaling group Sea Shepherd has called a halt to its famous missions tracking the Japanese whaling fleet in the Southern Ocean.</p>
<p>For the past 12 years the group’s boats have engaged in annual high-seas battles with vessels carrying out Japan’s self-described scientific whaling program. But Sea Shepherd founder Paul Watson <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-29/sea-shepherd-abandons-antarctic-whale-wars/8851890">has admitted</a> that Japan’s use of military-grade technology such as real-time satellite tracking has left the activists unable to keep up.</p>
<p>Watson also criticised the Australian government over its response to Japan’s whaling program, despite a <a href="https://iwc.int/convention">global ban on most whaling</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/murky-waters-why-is-japan-still-whaling-in-the-southern-ocean-71402">Murky waters: why is Japan still whaling in the Southern Ocean?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Scientific whaling is technically allowed under the <a href="https://theconversation.com/murky-waters-why-is-japan-still-whaling-in-the-southern-ocean-71402">International Whaling Commission’s treaty</a>, and countries such as Japan have the right to decide for themselves what constitutes “scientific” in this context.</p>
<p>Australia is not the only government to be accused of reluctance to stand up to Japan. But in 2014, Japan’s pretext for whaling was finally discredited when Australia <a href="https://theconversation.com/whaling-in-the-antarctic-japans-scientific-program-illegal-23824">won a case at the International Court of Justice in The Hague</a>. And, <a href="https://theconversation.com/japans-whaling-fleet-sets-sail-again-and-theres-not-much-that-can-stop-it-51556">for a year</a>, the Japanese whaling stopped. </p>
<p>This episode of Change Agents tells the back story of how that happened through the eyes of two key players, ANU legal academic Don Rothwell and Darren Kindleysides, who was then campaign manager at the International Fund for Animal Welfare. They worked on a strategy to provide both the legal argument and the political will for Australia to take on Japan in the courts.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Change Agents is a collaboration between The Conversation and the Swinburne Business School and Swinburne University’s Department of Media and Communication. It is presented by Andrew Dodd and produced by Samuel Wilson and Andrew Dodd, with production by Heather Jarvis.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/82899/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
In this episode of Change Agents, Andrew Dodd speaks with Darren Kindleysides and Don Rothwell on how Australia won a case against Japan's whaling activities at the International Court of Justice.
Andrew Dodd, Program Director – Journalism, Swinburne University of Technology
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/71402
2017-01-17T19:07:25Z
2017-01-17T19:07:25Z
Murky waters: why is Japan still whaling in the Southern Ocean?
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152963/original/image-20170117-22302-9udc28.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A photo from Sea Shepherd allegedly shows a Japanese whaling vessel with a dead minke whale on board. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/GLENN LOCKITCH / SEA SHEPHERD HANDOUT </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Photographs allegedly showing <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-38606557">Japanese whaling operations in the Southern Ocean</a> emerged this week. Coinciding with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s visit to Australia, critics have called for <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-16/japanese-whaling-criticised-by-government-sea-shepherd-footage/8184640">greater action from the Australian government</a> on the issue.</p>
<p>Japan has stated that, despite various resolutions at the <a href="https://iwc.int/home">International Whaling Commission</a> and criticism from many governments about its so-called “scientific” activity, it abides by its own interpretation of the <a href="https://iwc.int/convention">Whaling Convention</a> – the international agreement that governs whaling. This interpretation focuses on Article VIII of the convention, which allows a country to issue its own permits to kill whales for research. </p>
<p>The same issues are raised each summer when Japanese whaling fleets head south. But the apparently obvious questions have complex answers.</p>
<h2>Didn’t the International Court of Justice ban Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean?</h2>
<p>The 2014 International Court of Justice (ICJ) <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&k=64&case=148&code=aj&p3=4">whaling decision</a> was quite narrow. It ruled that the old JARPA II scientific program was not for the purposes of scientific research. </p>
<p>Therefore, the court deemed that Japanese whaling was a commercial operation, something that had been <a href="https://iwc.int/commercial">banned under the Whaling Convention</a> since 1985. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/japanese-whaling-ruled-unlawful/5358114">Labor’s former attorney-general, Mark Dreyfus</a>, noted that the court had not completely ordered cessation of whaling for all time. And this is correct. </p>
<p>While the judgment gave guidance on what is and what isn’t “for the purposes of scientific research”, it did not ban Japan from conducting further scientific research activity under the convention.</p>
<p>In response to the judgment, the Japanese government abandoned the JARPA II program. The current and very similar NEWREP-A program took its place. This program, in all likelihood, is “not for the purposes of scientific research” either.</p>
<h2>Should Australia take Japan back to court?</h2>
<p>Following the ICJ case, <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/jurisdiction/?p1=5&p2=1&p3=3&code=JP">Japan ruled out</a> the jurisdiction of the ICJ in “any dispute arising out of, concerning, or relating to research on, or conservation, management or exploitation of, living resources of the sea”.</p>
<p>Therefore, Australia could not take Japan back to the ICJ on this issue.</p>
<h2>Is the whaling fleet operating in Australian waters?</h2>
<p>The waters below 60 degrees south fall under the <a href="http://www.ats.aq/index_e.htm">Antarctic Treaty</a>, to which Australia and Japan are both parties. The treaty was a peaceful territorial compromise between countries (like Australia) that claim parts of the Antarctic continent, and other countries (like Japan) that do not recognise those claims. </p>
<p>Australia claims about 5.9 million square kilometres of the Antarctic continent, and the adjacent ocean out to 200 nautical miles.</p>
<p>However, the treaty “freezes” any arguments over the sovereign claims by Australia, New Zealand, France, UK, Chile, Argentina and Norway, and has developed a complex web of instruments that protect the Antarctic environment and maintain the continent as a place of peace and science.</p>
<p>While Australia does not relinquish its claim to Antarctica under the treaty, it agrees to comply fully with the treaty’s rules and obligations. In turn, this means countries that don’t recognise claims are free to go about scientific research and peaceful activities.</p>
<p>Japan does not recognise Australia’s claim to the Antarctic continent. As such, it views the waters off the Australian Antarctic Territory as the high seas, which are governed by the United Nations Convention on the <a href="http://www.un.org/depts/los/">Law of the Sea</a>. </p>
<p>The Antarctic Treaty’s <a href="http://www.ats.aq/e/ep.htm">Environment Protocol</a> also explicitly states that it does not affect the rights of countries under the Whaling Convention. </p>
<p>In almost all cases, only Australian citizens are bound by Australian law in Antarctica. If there are any issues of jurisdiction under the provisions of the treaty, countries must resolve them peacefully, or refer them to the ICJ. </p>
<h2>Didn’t the Australian Federal Court say whaling is illegal?</h2>
<p>In 2008, the Humane Society International took Japanese whaling company <a href="http://www.edonsw.org.au/humane_society_international_inc_v_kyodo_senpaku_kaisha_ltd">Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha to court</a> over whaling in Australia’s Antarctic waters, which Australia calls the <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/marine/marine-species/cetaceans/australian-whale-sanctuary">Australian Whale Sanctuary</a>. </p>
<p>The Federal Court held that whaling in Australia’s maritime claim was illegal under Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity (EPBC) Act. </p>
<p>It’s not up to the Federal Court to question Australia’s claim to Antarctic waters, so it applied Australian law in a consistent manner. The EPBC Act is also one of the few that extends to non-Australian citizens in Australian-claimed waters in Antarctica. </p>
<p>But remember that Japan does not recognise Australia’s claim to Antarctic waters. Even though the Federal Court recognised this, it held that this was not a reason to withold judgment. In 2015, Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha was held in contempt of court orders by continuing to kill whales, and was fined A$1 million. </p>
<p>The Japanese government responded to the case, stating that “this issue relates to waters and a matter over which Japan does not recognise Australian jurisdiction”. Therefore, the restraining orders and injunction on further whaling are still outstanding and will likely remain so.</p>
<h2>Should we send Australian ships to confront the whalers?</h2>
<p>The Australian and Japanese governments are under an obligation to prevent Antarctica becoming a place of discord. Any confrontation on the high seas would be seen as an incredibly aggressive and potentially illegal act. </p>
<p>The Australian vessel Oceanic Viking was sent to <a href="http://foreignminister.gov.au/releases/2008/fa-s039_08.html">monitor the fleet in 2008</a> to compile evidence for the ICJ case. It did not intervene physically with the whaling fleet, likely due to its potential illegality, aggressiveness, concern for the safety of lives at sea, and environmental reasons. </p>
<p>Japan is transparent about its catches and reports all its activities (including the number of whales it kills) to the Whaling Commission as part of its self-issued scientific whaling permit. Countries that are members of the commission therefore have access to all the information on Japanese activities. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-16/greens-call-on-govt-to-monitor-japanese-whaling-in/8186184">The Greens are calling</a> for the Australian Border Force to be sent to Australia’s Antarctic waters, but, for the reasons above, this is likely to be futile. </p>
<h2>What now?</h2>
<p>Australia appears to have exhausted most legal options. <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-23/sea-shepherd-hunting-japanese-fleet-whaling-season-begins/8145652">Professor Tim Stephens noted</a>, however, that the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea could be a forum where Japan is challenged over its activities. </p>
<p>Obligations under the Law of the Sea Convention include mandatory dispute resolution, the protection and preservation of the marine environment, and duties to cooperate.</p>
<p>Several <a href="https://theconversation.com/could-whale-poo-diplomacy-help-bring-an-end-to-whaling-69154">alternative courses</a> of action have been suggested and <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-new-international-whaling-resolution-will-do-little-to-stop-japan-killing-whales-67854">new resolutions at the Whaling Commission</a> have yet to be implemented. However, the decision to stop Japanese whaling is, in reality, likely to come only from the Japanese people themselves.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/71402/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Indi Hodgson-Johnston receives scholarship funding from the University of Tasmania's Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies and the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre. </span></em></p>
Japan is once again allegedly killing whales in Antarctica. But after taking Japan to international court in 2014, there’s not much Australia can do.
Indi Hodgson-Johnston, Antarctic Law Researcher, PhD Candidate, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies and the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, University of Tasmania
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/69154
2016-11-23T04:47:51Z
2016-11-23T04:47:51Z
Could ‘whale poo diplomacy’ help bring an end to whaling?
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/147117/original/image-20161123-19726-p1i2ls.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The idea is to come up with better alternatives to this.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AJapan_Factory_Ship_Nisshin_Maru_Whaling_Mother_and_Calf.jpg">Australian Customs and Border Protection Service</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Japan’s fleet has <a href="http://www.news.com.au/world/breaking-news/japan-kicks-off-whaling-season/news-story/39637fc0e6776a370639fa5926d13b7b">left port</a> for another season of “scientific” research whaling in the Southern Ocean.</p>
<p>Like <a href="https://theconversation.com/japans-whaling-fleet-sets-sail-again-and-theres-not-much-that-can-stop-it-51556">last year</a>, there is little that anyone can do to legally rescind Japan’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-new-international-whaling-resolution-will-do-little-to-stop-japan-killing-whales-67854">self-issued lethal research permit</a> – a fact that has led to calls for <a href="https://theconversation.com/with-a-less-confrontational-approach-to-whaling-more-whales-could-be-saved-68064">more pragmatism and less confrontation</a> in efforts to conserve whales. </p>
<p>Such avenues include greater collaboration between the <a href="https://iwc.int/home">International Whaling Commission (IWC)</a> and other organisations, and a renewed emphasis on marine ecosystem research in the Southern Ocean. </p>
<h2>How whale poo can help</h2>
<p>While Japan’s new whaling program <a href="https://iwc.int/day-four-special-permit-whaling">dominated the IWC’s summit last month</a>, a Chilean-sponsored resolution nicknamed the <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org.au/blog/iwc-kicks-off/">“whale poo” resolution</a> was also quietly adopted at the meeting. </p>
<p>More formally known as the <a href="https://archive.iwc.int/pages/view.php?ref=6185&search=%21collection24471&order_by=relevance&sort=DESC&offset=0&archive=0&k=&curpos=15&restypes=">Draft Resolution on Cetaceans and Their Contribution to Ecosystem Functioning</a>, the resolution notes the growing scientific evidence that whale faeces are <a href="https://theconversation.com/bottoms-up-how-whale-poop-helps-feed-the-ocean-27913">a crucial source of micronutrients for plankton</a>.</p>
<p>The resolution will lead to a review of the ecological, environmental, social and economic aspects of whale defecation “as a matter of importance”, while the IWC’s Scientific Committee will review the research and identify any relevant knowledge gaps.</p>
<h2>Why is this important?</h2>
<p>Much of the Southern Ocean is described as high-nutrient, low-chlorophyll (HNLC) waters. This means that the despite high concentrations of important nutrients such as nitrate and phosphate, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/bottoms-up-how-whale-poop-helps-feed-the-ocean-27913">abundance of phytoplankton is very low</a>.</p>
<p>Phytoplankton is the base of the marine food chain, and plays an important role in the global carbon cycle by removing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through photosynthesis. However, the growth of phytoplankton in large HNLC regions of the Southern Ocean is limited by the availability of a key micronutrient: iron. In essence, the Southern Ocean is anaemic, and whale poo is the remedy.</p>
<p>It works like this. Antarctic krill graze on phytoplankton, taking up the iron. The krill are then consumed by whales, which store some iron for their own use as an oxygen carrier in their blood (as in ours), but also expel large amounts of iron in their faeces.</p>
<p>Adult blue whales, for example, consume about 2 tonnes of krill a day, and the amount of iron in their faeces is <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-2979.2010.00356.x/full">more than 10 million times higher than normal seawater</a>.</p>
<p>Conveniently, whale poo is liquid, and is released at the surface where it can act as a fertiliser to promote phytoplankton growth in the ocean’s sunlit top layers. Therefore, whales are part of a positive feedback loop that helps sustain marine food chains.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/146958/original/image-20161122-24538-1128os4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/146958/original/image-20161122-24538-1128os4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/146958/original/image-20161122-24538-1128os4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=327&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/146958/original/image-20161122-24538-1128os4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=327&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/146958/original/image-20161122-24538-1128os4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=327&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/146958/original/image-20161122-24538-1128os4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/146958/original/image-20161122-24538-1128os4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/146958/original/image-20161122-24538-1128os4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The whale poo positive feedback loop.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Indi Hodgson-Johnston/University of Tasmania</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>More whales obviously make more whale poo, so it makes sense that more research and protection should be afforded to whales to ensure a <a href="https://theconversation.com/bottoms-up-how-whale-poop-helps-feed-the-ocean-27913">healthier marine ecosystem</a>. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.antarctica.gov.au/magazine/2006-2010/issue-19-2010/science/whale-poo-fertilises-oceans">Scientists collect whale faeces</a> from the surface of the water, making this a great way to do whale research without killing or harming them.</p>
<h2>What about scientific whaling?</h2>
<p>Some have suggested that the legal arguments against scientific whaling are well and truly exhausted, and that <a href="https://theconversation.com/with-a-less-confrontational-approach-to-whaling-more-whales-could-be-saved-68064">controlled commercial whaling could be the next step</a>. Assuming that anti-whaling nations such as Australia would not follow such a pathway, and that hard law options are frustrated, other avenues to end lethal research are needed. </p>
<p>The whale poo resolution also aims to increase the IWC’s existing collaborations with various research organisations. This includes the <a href="https://www.ccamlr.org/">Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)</a>, of which Japan is a member. CCAMLR made headlines last month when it approved, by consensus, the <a href="https://www.ccamlr.org/en/news/2016/ccamlr-create-worlds-largest-marine-protected-area">world’s largest marine protected area in Antarctica’s Ross Sea</a>.</p>
<p>While the <a href="https://www.ccamlr.org/en/organisation/camlr-convention">CCAMLR Convention</a> states that nothing in it shall derogate from the rights and obligations under the Whaling Convention, the role of whales are important to CCAMLR’s <a href="https://www.ccamlr.org/en/publications/ecosystem-approach">ecosystem approach</a> to conserving marine life in the Southern Ocean. </p>
<p>Japan’s current whaling program has the <a href="http://www.icrwhale.org/NEWREP-AProtocol.html">stated scientific objective</a> of investigating “the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem through building ecosystem models”. This aligns with both the research needed for CCAMLR’s ecosystem approach and the Australian Antarctic Division’s <a href="http://www.antarctica.gov.au/science/australian-antarctic-science-strategic-plan-201112-202021/theme-3">own research priorities</a>. </p>
<p>With an emphasis on research such as ecosystem modelling, collaborations that include and value Japan’s abundant <em>non-lethal</em> research in the area could help to most of the stated scientific objectives of Japan’s whaling program without harming whales. </p>
<p>Of course, many people contend that the main purpose of Japan’s whaling program is not scientific. But this doesn’t change the fact that the same old battles at sea and in the courts have done little to prevent the taking of whales. The Whaling Convention cannot be changed, and nor can Japan’s interpretation of it. A different tack is clearly needed in both law and diplomacy. </p>
<p>As the new marine protected area shows, Antarctica is a proven platform of peace. Increasing joint scientific research, and riding on the wave of the recent success in the Ross Sea, may provide fresh dialogue with which to resolve the stalemate. What we need is a newly respectful, non-combative discourse with Japan which, whaling aside, is a brilliant contributor to Antarctic science. </p>
<p>Joint Australian and Japanese research in other areas of Southern Ocean and Antarctic science has a long and friendly history. It is upon these longstanding and positive relationships that research addressing relevant objectives should be focused and funded.</p>
<h2>Constructive intervention</h2>
<p>While some, including the <a href="http://greens.org.au/protecting-worlds-whales">Australian Greens</a>, have called for an Australian government vessel to intervene, Japan is whaling in waters that are recognised by most countries as the high seas. </p>
<p>Since the landmark <a href="https://theconversation.com/japan-could-resume-whaling-this-time-with-the-hagues-blessing-31351">2014 International Court of Justice ruling</a>, Japan no longer consents to that court’s jurisdiction on matters of living marine resources. And with little recognition of Australian jurisdiction in the area, and the risk of any intervention being illegal under <a href="http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part7.htm">laws of the sea</a>, there is little hope for successful international legal action. Sending an Australian ship to intervene or collect evidence would therefore be largely futile. </p>
<p>On the other hand, researching marine ecosystems in the Southern Ocean is difficult and expensive. Instead of sending a customs vessel, Australia should divert its funds and attention to research that will boost our understanding of the Southern Ocean ecosystem and its role in the global carbon cycle.</p>
<p>By increasing knowledge and recognition of whales’ role in the Southern Ocean ecosystem, the resolution offers yet another avenue for developing norms of non-lethal whale research that are recognised as legitimate by all International Whaling Commission members.</p>
<p>Perhaps in one of Australia’s most vexed diplomatic issues with their close ally, whale poo could pave the way to more intensive and thoughtful scientific collaborations, and help deliver a peaceful end to Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean.</p>
<p><em>The author would like to thank Lavy Ratnarajah, a biogeochemist at the <a href="http://acecrc.org.au/">Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC</a>, for her kind assistance with the scientific aspects of this article. The views expressed are solely those of the author.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/69154/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Indi Hodgson-Johnston receives funding from the University of Tasmania. </span></em></p>
Japan’s fleet is on its way to the Southern Ocean for more “scientific” whaling. But a new resolution pointing out the importance of whale poo could help remove Japan’s rationale for lethal research.
Indi Hodgson-Johnston, Antarctic Law Researcher, PhD Candidate, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies and the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, University of Tasmania
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/67854
2016-10-30T19:09:16Z
2016-10-30T19:09:16Z
The new international whaling resolution will do little to stop Japan killing whales
<p>Australia and New Zealand were claiming a conservation success this week, when their <a href="https://archive.iwc.int/pages/view.php?ref=6181&search=%21collection24471&order_by=relevance&sort=DESC&offset=0&archive=0&k=&curpos=11&restypes=">resolution</a> against lethal “scientific” whaling was adopted at the <a href="https://iwc.int/iwc66">International Whaling Commission’s biennial meeting</a> in Slovenia. But in reality the non-binding decision will do little to stop Japan’s whaling program.</p>
<p>This resolution aims to tighten the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-28/international-body-votes-to-tighten-loophole-on/7973994">loophole</a> that allows nations to catch whales under the guise of scientific whaling. It provides for greater oversight of the currently self-assessed <a href="https://iwc.int/permits">special permits</a> for lethal scientific whale research.</p>
<p>After the disappointment of <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-26/japan-allies-block-proposal-for-south-atlantic-whale-sanctuary/7965288">failing to establish a South Atlantic whale sanctuary</a>, the anti-whaling bloc of nations at the IWC meeting have hailed the latest resolution, with Australia’s environment minister Josh Frydenberg <a href="http://www.joshfrydenberg.com.au/guest/mediaReleasesDetails.aspx?id=276">describing</a> the decision as “a big win”.</p>
<h2>Where next for Japanese whaling?</h2>
<p>Japan conducts its whaling under a self-issued permit, under Article VIII of the <a href="https://iwc.int/convention">International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling</a>. This article allows a country to grant its nationals special licence “to kill, take and treat whales for purposes of scientific research subject to such restrictions as to number and subject to such other conditions as the Contracting Government thinks fit”.</p>
<p>In 2014 the International Court of Justice <a href="https://theconversation.com/whaling-in-the-antarctic-japans-scientific-program-illegal-23824">ruled Japan’s JARPA II whaling program illegal</a> on the basis that it was “not for the purposes of scientific research” and therefore in breach of Article VIII. But crucially it did not ban all future scientific whaling activities by Japan. </p>
<p>After the decision, Japan <a href="https://theconversation.com/japans-whaling-fleet-sets-sail-again-and-theres-not-much-that-can-stop-it-51556">created a new research programme</a> called NEWREP-A (New Scientific Whale Research Program in the Antarctic Ocean), which purported to have different scientific methods to its predecessor.</p>
<p>As Japan no longer recognises the <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/jurisdiction/?p1=5&p2=1&p3=3&code=JP">jurisdiction</a> of the International Court of Justice regarding “living resources of the sea”, arguments on adherence to the broader principle laid down in the decision would possibly be in vain.</p>
<h2>A new tack</h2>
<p>This brings us back to the new resolution, which was brought to the IWC by Australia, New Zealand and other anti-whaling nations in a bid to make it harder for nations such as Japan to issue themselves with special permits for scientific whaling. </p>
<p>The underlying principle is Australia’s repeated <a href="http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/09/18/australia-japan-clash-over-whaling">assertion</a> that “lethal scientific research is simply not necessary”.</p>
<p>Japan’s new NEWREP-A program included the killing of 333 minke whales in the 2015-16 season, and the IWC’s Scientific Committee was <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-21/whaling-japan-scientists-slam-renewed-program/7099336">powerless</a> to prevent Japan from proceeding, given that the conditions of special permits are currently self-assessed and can proceed without scientific endorsement from the committee.</p>
<p>The new resolution establishes a Working Group under the Convention, which will consider the Scientific Committee’s recommendations in relation to all special permits. It also gives a greater role to the Commission in the process of issuing special permits. </p>
<p>The aim is to apply much greater scrutiny to the granting of special permits, rather than allowing nations simply to award them to themselves. Plans for special permits are requested to be submitted to the new working group at least six months in advance of the Scientific Committee’s meeting, alongside the data used to back up a country’s claims to be running a scientific whaling program. These data will be evaluated both during the program’s development, and during ongoing and final reviews. </p>
<p>These inquiries into the special permit will then be presented to the IWC itself, which will form its own official view on the proposed whaling program and publish its findings.</p>
<p>Overall, the resolution gives the Commission a much greater role in deciding whether a given nation should be allowed to kill whales. But resolutions are not legally binding, and there is no function to penalise those who do not follow them.</p>
<h2>Non-binding resolutions</h2>
<p>In response to the new resolution, Japan’s Commissioner to the IWC <a href="http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/10/28/national/iwc-moves-curb-japans-scientific-whaling-critics-say-effort-toothless/#.WBK0_Nz4OVs">said</a> that Japan “will abide by the Convention itself”. This implies that Japan will continue to apply its own interpretation of the Convention, and will not follow the extra steps outlined in the new resolution.</p>
<p>So despite the new emphasis on applying scientific scrutiny to whaling permits, at a higher level than before within the IWC’s structure, this actually doesn’t mean much in practical terms for Japan. The reality is that Japan will continue to act independently of IWC advice due to its view on what Article VIII means.</p>
<p>As a result, Japan is unlikely to stop killing whales any time soon, despite the efforts of Australia, New Zealand and other anti-whaling nations to shut the program down.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/67854/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Indi Hodgson-Johnston receives funding from the University of Tasmania and the Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems CRC. </span></em></p>
Australia’s new resolution will apply stricter monitoring to the special permits that allow some nations to continue whaling. But the new rules are non-binding, meaning countries are free to ignore them.
Indi Hodgson-Johnston, Antarctic Law and Policy Researcher, PhD Candidate, University of Tasmania
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/67696
2016-10-30T19:06:26Z
2016-10-30T19:06:26Z
Turnbull wants to change Australia’s environment act - here’s what we stand to lose
<p>Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is seeking changes to Australia’s national environment act to stop conservation groups from challenging ministerial decisions on major resource developments and other matters of environmental importance.</p>
<p>Turnbull is reviving a bid made by former Prime Minister Tony Abbott to abolish Section 487 of the <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/factsheet-epbc-act-frequently-asked-questions">Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act</a> (EPBC Act) - a bid rejected in the Senate in 2015. If it goes ahead, the change will significantly diminish the functionality of the act.</p>
<p>The EPBC Act, introduced by the Howard government in 1999, has an established record of success. Judicial oversight of ministerial discretion, enabled by expanded standing under Section 487, has been crucial to its success.</p>
<p>Section 487 allows individuals and groups to challenge ministerial decisions on resources, developments and other issues under the EPBC Act. An organisation can establish standing by showing they have engaged in activities for the “protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment” within the previous two years. They must also show that their purpose is environmental protection. </p>
<p>Repealing this provision would remove the standing of these groups to seek judicial review of decisions. Standing would then revert to the common law position. That means parties would need to prove they are a “person aggrieved” by showing that their interests have been impacted directly.</p>
<p>Many environmental groups will be unable to satisfy the common law test, leaving a <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/restricting-environmental-groups-excludes-aussie-voices/7961882">very small group of people</a> with the right to request judicial review – essentially, the right to check that federal ministerial power under the EPBC Act has been exercised properly.</p>
<p>This is likely to have a devastating impact on fragile ecological systems and biodiversity conservation strategies.</p>
<p>This is particularly concerning given the dramatic changes affecting the environment from the expansion of onshore resource development and the <a href="http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/">acceleration of climate change</a>.</p>
<h2>Why do we have the EPBC Act?</h2>
<p>The EPBC Act was designed to promote the introduction of ecologically sustainable resource development. This means federal environment ministers must take into account the economic, environmental and social impacts of proposals. </p>
<p>The EPBC Act is triggered and developments require Federal approval when they affect:</p>
<ul>
<li>World heritage sites</li>
<li>National heritage sites </li>
<li>Wetlands</li>
<li>Threatened species and ecological communities</li>
<li>Migratory species</li>
<li>Nuclear actions, and </li>
<li>Commonwealth marine areas. </li>
</ul>
<p>Since its implementation, Section 487 has proved critical to the success of significant achievements in environmental protection and management. Here are just a few examples. </p>
<h2>The Nathan Dam case</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCAFC/2004/190.html">Nathan Dam case</a> handed down in 2004 tested the protective scope of the EPBC Act. </p>
<p>Using Section 487, the Queensland Conservation Council and WWF Australia challenged the Federal Environment Minister’s decision to approve the construction of a large dam in central Queensland.</p>
<p>The dam was built to supply water for crop irrigation and other developments in the catchment of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area. The issue was whether the minister, in granting approval, was required to take into account the impact of pollution from farmers using water supplied by the dam. </p>
<p>The Full Federal Court held that adverse impacts such as downstream pollution by irrigators did need to be taken into account by the minister. The importance of this decision lay in the finding that the scope of the EPBC Act was very broad, requiring the minister to consider indirect environmental impacts, including the acts of third parties where those acts could be reasonably anticipated.</p>
<p>The decision also resulted in an <a href="ii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/epabca1999588/s527e.html">amendment</a> to the definition of “impact” set out in the act.</p>
<h2>The Wielangta Forest case</h2>
<p>In the 2006 <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UTasLawRw/2009/5.pdf">Wielangta Forest case</a> Senator Bob Brown of the Australian Greens argued that Forestry Tasmania’s operations were having a significant impact on three threatened species: the <a href="http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/?base=5121">Tasmanian Wedge-Tailed Eagle</a>, the <a href="http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/indeX.aspX?base=1089">broad-toothed stag beetle</a> and the <a href="http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/?base=5132">Swift Parrot</a>.</p>
<p>The Federal Court held that the loss of habitat was cumulative and had a dramatic impact on the three protected species. The court concluded that the objectives of the EPBC Act were to protect threatened species as well as restore populations so they were no longer threatened.</p>
<p>Forestry Tasmania had not complied with the Regional Forestry Agreements Act, because there was insufficient protection provided for threatened species. This meant that Forestry Tasmania could not claim an exemption from the application of the EPBC Act.</p>
<p>The decision is important because it highlights the ability of the Act, where judicial review is sought under Section 487 by an interested party, to determine the suitability of state practices for the protection and restoration of endangered species.</p>
<h2>The Japanese whaling case</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UTasLawRw/2007/4.pdf">The case</a> brought by Humane Society International Inc (HSI) against Kyodo Senpaku Keisha Ltd (Kyodo) tested the scope of the EPBC Act to protect endangered species in international waters.</p>
<p>HSI sought to stop the Japanese company from scientific whaling in the Australian Whale Sanctuary. In response, Japan claimed it did not recognise Australia’s sovereignty over the Antarctic waters that lay within the sanctuary.</p>
<p>The Federal Court declared that Kyodo was in breach of the EPBC Act and granted HSI an injunction restraining Kyodo from committing further breaches. HSI’s standing under Section 487 was critical - without it, the case would not have been brought.</p>
<h2>The Carmichael coal mine cases</h2>
<p>In 2014 and 2015 two cases were brought challenging the decision of the Federal Environment Minister, Greg Hunt, to <a href="https://theconversation.com/greg-hunt-approves-adanis-carmichael-coal-mine-again-experts-respond-49227">approve the Carmichael coal mine</a>. The coal mine, one of the world’s largest, was to be developed by a subsidiary of the Indian company, Adani.</p>
<p>In early 2015 the Mackay Conservation Group brought an action in the Federal Court arguing that the Minister had failed to consider two listed threatened species, the <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/yakka-skink-egernia-rugosa">yakka skink</a> and the <a href="https://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/animals-az/ornamental_snake.html">ornamental snake</a>.</p>
<p>No judgement was issued, but the court issued a statement that the Minister had failed to take these species into account when making the approval.</p>
<p>In 2016, the Australian Conservation Foundation brought a further case arguing that Hunt had failed to take account of the climate impact from the mine. It’s estimated the burning of coal from these mines will generate approximately 4.7 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.</p>
<p>In ACF v The Minister for the Environment, the Federal court concluded that the decision of the Environment Minister was legal, did not breach the EPBC Act and did not contravene the precautionary principle because there was no threat of serious or irreversible environmental damage to the Great Barrier Reef National Park.</p>
<p>ACF then sought an appeal from this decision to the Full Federal Court on the 16th of September, 2016. When handed down, the decision will be crucially important for the future of climate governance in Australia.</p>
<p>None of these decisions would have been possible without the groups’ standing under Section 487 of the EPBC Act. Removing these provisions undermines the foundational objectives of Australia’s national environmental act at a time when its protective capabilities are needed most.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/67696/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Samantha Hepburn does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s proposed changes to Australia’s national environment act will significantly reduce judicial oversight on environmental decisions. Here’s why that matters.
Samantha Hepburn, Director of the Centre for Energy and Natural Resources Law, Deakin Law School, Deakin University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/55941
2016-03-08T18:58:35Z
2016-03-08T18:58:35Z
Antarctica’s blue whales are split into three distinct populations
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/114243/original/image-20160308-15328-1oky88f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">DNA analysis reveals that there are three populations of Antarctic blue whales.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Paula Olson, courtesy of IWC</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Antarctica’s critically endangered blue whales, the world’s largest animal, are made up of three populations, according to our new <a href="http://www.nature.com/articles/srep22291">DNA analysis</a>. </p>
<p>Although the groups occur together when feeding in Antarctic waters, they are genetically distinct. This suggests that the three groups breed in different locations – possibly even different oceans – when they head north in the winter.</p>
<p>If we can find out where they go, and what hazards they face on the way, we will be a step closer to helping them recover from their near-annihilation by whalers during the 20th century.</p>
<h2>Hidden giants</h2>
<p>It is a daunting task to understand the ecology of the Antarctic blue whale (<em>Balaenoptera musculus intermedia</em>). Even though they can weigh more than 160 tonnes – the heaviest ever known animal – and reach more than 30 metres in length, locating such a rare and highly mobile species in a vast and remote ocean can be like finding a needle in a haystack. And even having tracked them down, it can be hard to deduce anything about their population structure.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/114237/original/image-20160308-15323-138k6aw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/114237/original/image-20160308-15323-138k6aw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/114237/original/image-20160308-15323-138k6aw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/114237/original/image-20160308-15323-138k6aw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/114237/original/image-20160308-15323-138k6aw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/114237/original/image-20160308-15323-138k6aw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/114237/original/image-20160308-15323-138k6aw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The largest animal in the world.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Paula Olson, courtesy of IWC</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>By comparing similarities and differences in the DNA of individuals, we can tell which individuals are part of the same population and estimate the number of populations. Individuals from the same breeding population are more genetically similar than those from different populations. But we need recently collected DNA samples to do this for current populations.</p>
<p>The standard way to get DNA from a blue whale is to take a biopsy by firing a dart that collects a small piece of skin and blubber, bounces off the whale and floats on the water for collection. It is akin to a pinprick for an animal as massive as a whale.</p>
<p>Long before we started working with blue whales in 2007, expeditions have been <a href="https://iwc.int/sower">carried out under the auspices of the International Whaling Commission</a> to research Antarctic whales. These expeditions involved collecting precious biopsy samples from blue whales and there is now a collection stretching back to 1990.</p>
<p>We were granted access to samples, totalling 142 whales, and used these to create the largest and therefore most powerful genetic data set so far created for Antarctic blue whales. As our research <a href="http://www.nature.com/articles/srep22291">published in Nature’s Scientific Reports</a> shows, we found that these whales fall into three genetically distinct groups.</p>
<h2>Where are these populations?</h2>
<p>Blue whales, like many other whales, migrate between their Antarctic summer feeding grounds and their winter breeding grounds at lower latitudes.</p>
<p>We know Antarctic blue whales feed in the Antarctic, which is where they were hunted during whaling in the 20th century and where the biopsy samples were collected.</p>
<p>We found that individuals from the three populations occur together throughout the Antarctic, although possibly in different proportions in different areas. This is probably because the blue whales need to rove long distances around Antarctica to find the massive amounts of krill that make up their sole food source.</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-236" class="tc-infographic" height="400" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/236/bc14e5189a4da42a31724b8bc8aaf0f2ed2217a8/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><strong>Distribution of samples from the three genetically distinct populations of Antarctic blue whales</strong></p>
<p>We suspect that the three populations go their separate ways when they head north to breed – presumably heading into the three major Southern Hemisphere ocean basins: the South Pacific, South Atlantic and Indian Oceans. </p>
<p>The next step will be to confirm this by finding their breeding grounds. This would involve satellite-tagging whales in Antarctic waters and then watching where they go. More biopsy samples could then be taken at the breeding grounds to confirm which populations are which.</p>
<h2>Knowledge for conservation</h2>
<p>Understanding the number of populations and their distribution is vital for helping Antarctica’s blue whales recover from 20th-century whaling, which reduced their numbers from <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1748-7692.2004.tb01190.x/abstract;jsessionid=9AD2973A594FC64045ED1627E769B019.d02t03">239,000 to just 360 individuals</a>. While they are now <a href="http://www.marinemammals.gov.au/sorp/antarctic-blue-whale-project">protected from whaling</a>, they remain <a href="http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/41713/0">critically endangered</a>.</p>
<p>Some populations may be more endangered than others and may face different human threats along their migration routes and at their breeding grounds. Failing to take conservation action at a population level could therefore lead to local extinctions at these locations.</p>
<p>One threat that differs in intensity between locations is noise pollution, such as from seismic surveys for oil and gas as well as shipping activity. These noises can be heard underwater hundreds of kilometres from their source. Whales communicate through sound, so noise pollution can hinder their communications or, in extreme cases, make areas uninhabitable.</p>
<p>Our latest findings, together with our previous work on <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/11/19/3635942.htm">hybridisation</a>, <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10592-010-0121-9">connectivity</a> and <a href="http://blogs.flinders.edu.au/flinders-news/2015/05/07/low-gene-diversity-in-blue-whales-is-natural-not-man-made/">population history</a> of blue whales, provides important pieces in the puzzle of this species. But we are still at the tip of the iceberg in our understanding of the world’s largest animal and in the pathway to their recovery from whaling.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/55941/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Catherine R. M. Attard has received funding from the Australian Marine Mammal Centre of the Department of the Environment.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Luciana Möller has received funding from the Australian Marine Mammal Centre of the Department of the Environment.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Luciano Beheregaray receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>
Antarctica’s blue whales all feed in the same place. But a new genetic analysis suggests they are actually three separate populations that breed in different parts of the globe.
Catherine R. M. Attard, Lecturer in Molecular Ecology, Flinders University
Luciana Möller, Associate Professor in Marine Biology, Flinders University
Luciano Beheregaray, Professor in Biodiversity Genetics and ARC Future Fellow, Flinders University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/51685
2015-12-28T07:56:02Z
2015-12-28T07:56:02Z
In the Heart of the Sea: the horrific true story behind Moby-Dick
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/105505/original/image-20151211-8335-1em81vp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">© Warner Brothers</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A man winds his way through the muck and mire of a 19th-century American port – Nantucket, centre of the world’s whaling industry. He knocks on a door, enters, and begs an exhausted looking man to tell him his story in exchange for his life savings. He’s heard rumours, he says, rumours about the 1820 sinking of the Essex, a whaling ship. The man – played by Ben Whishaw – turns out to be Herman Melville. He’s searching for the true story that will lead him to write <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/13/100-best-novels-observer-moby-dick">Moby-Dick</a>.</p>
<p>Ever since its publication in 1851, Moby-Dick has sparked the imagination with its prophetic, digressive and dangerous themes. So much so, it eclipsed the true story the novel is based on. But that real-life tale – that of a vengeful whale taking out a whaling ship – has now been adapted in true swashbuckling style by Ron Howard. The film, In the Heart of the Sea (released on Boxing Day), is based on Nathaniel Philbrick’s maritime history <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/books/2000/apr/22/historybooks.classics">book</a> of the same name.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106293/original/image-20151216-25621-ozytcd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106293/original/image-20151216-25621-ozytcd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106293/original/image-20151216-25621-ozytcd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106293/original/image-20151216-25621-ozytcd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106293/original/image-20151216-25621-ozytcd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106293/original/image-20151216-25621-ozytcd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106293/original/image-20151216-25621-ozytcd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ben Whishaw as Herman Melville.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">© Warner Brothers</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The story goes like this. In 1819, the whale-ship Essex set sail from Nantucket. A year into the voyage, 2,000 nautical miles (3,700 km) west of South America, a pod of whales was sighted by the lookout. The harpoonists set out in their small whale boats to reap their bounty. </p>
<p>But one of those small boats – that of first mate Owen Chase – was smashed to pieces by a whale’s tail. The crew returned to the Essex, whereupon, according to Chase, they saw “a large spermacetti whale about 85ft in length heading directly for them as if fired with revenge”. </p>
<p>The whale struck the Essex. And when it rammed the ship a second time, it was obvious that it would sink. The remaining crew of 20 men, thousands of miles from land, salvaged what supplies they could and set off in three small cedar boats. </p>
<p>Thus began an incredible tale of maritime survival. The men spent over three months at sea and had to resort to cannibalism in order to survive. Captain Pollard and Charles Ramsdell were discovered gnawing on the bones of their shipmates in one boat. Owen Chase, Lawrence and Nickerson also survived to tell the tale. In all, seven sailors were consumed. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106291/original/image-20151216-25637-1rlfzmj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106291/original/image-20151216-25637-1rlfzmj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106291/original/image-20151216-25637-1rlfzmj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106291/original/image-20151216-25637-1rlfzmj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106291/original/image-20151216-25637-1rlfzmj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106291/original/image-20151216-25637-1rlfzmj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106291/original/image-20151216-25637-1rlfzmj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Twelve Fishy Men, Angela Cockayne, 2013.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Moby Doll</h2>
<p>For several years now, the whale – and in particular the white whale, the ambiguous, mythical Moby-Dick – has been a recurring anchor for my own art work. </p>
<p>The relationship between humans and cetaceans has long been something of a paradox. We are drawn to their mystery and intelligence, in awe of their size and grace, yet we hunted many whales to near extinction, and still today use dolphins and orca for <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140328-navy-dolphin-sea-lion-combat-ocean-animal-science/">military manoeuvres</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/blackfish-proof-that-documentary-can-be-a-powerful-force-for-change-50494">entertainment</a>. The most likely reason that the historical whale turned on the Essex was not revenge, but self-defence. Perhaps it was protecting the calves that were routinely slaughtered to attract their oil rich mothers to their untimely demise.</p>
<p>Owen Chase’s first hand account of the whale describes it as male, and this has determined the way most accounts speak of the incident. But of course there’s at least a 50% per cent chance that the whale that attacked the boat was female. Sperm whales are matriarchal, they form strong social groups, babysit and suckle each other’s calves and act collectively to protect their young. If threatened, several females will form what is know as a marguerite pattern (daisy) around a young whale in need of protection to fend off attack. Bull whales, meanwhile, are solitary and leave the pod at maturity, returning only to mate.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106290/original/image-20151216-25600-1m351rh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106290/original/image-20151216-25600-1m351rh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106290/original/image-20151216-25600-1m351rh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106290/original/image-20151216-25600-1m351rh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106290/original/image-20151216-25600-1m351rh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=537&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106290/original/image-20151216-25600-1m351rh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=537&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/106290/original/image-20151216-25600-1m351rh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=537&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Moby Doll, Angela Cockayne, 2012.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Whale oil</h2>
<p>The whale of both In the Heart of the Sea and Moby-Dick is a charismatic beast; seeming to signify many contemporary themes – capitalism, religion, colonialism, morality, ecology, racism. The whale, like the canary in the mine, is also an ecological barometer. In our pursuit and dominion over nature, we expose our own flaws and vulnerability.</p>
<p>In pursuit of whale oil, these unfortunate mariners crossed the unutterable taboo of cannibalism (ironically, once adrift they voted against trying to head west to the nearest islands, the Marquesas, due to rumours of cannibalistic inhabitants). And while the good Quaker folk of Nantucket fought for the abolition of slavery, they also continued to pursue the noble domestication of the savages encountered on whaling voyages. Placing missionaries among cannibals they asked them to “eat” the flesh and drink the “blood” of a new god.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/105496/original/image-20151211-26236-4x7jfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/105496/original/image-20151211-26236-4x7jfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=324&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/105496/original/image-20151211-26236-4x7jfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=324&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/105496/original/image-20151211-26236-4x7jfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=324&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/105496/original/image-20151211-26236-4x7jfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/105496/original/image-20151211-26236-4x7jfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/105496/original/image-20151211-26236-4x7jfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">There she blows.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">© Warner Brothers</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The whales that the men of Nantucket were at sea brutally harvesting were one of the first global commodities. Their oil illuminated and lubricated the Industrial Revolution, generating vast fortunes. Hunting down these creatures for fuel may seem archaic today, but it was the historical version of coal or gas, crucial to the world economy. Towards the end of the film the old Thomas Nickerson says, “I hear someone’s found oil by drilling into the ground. Who’d have thought!” </p>
<p>Our pursuit of the highly intelligent whale, a creature that has roamed the ocean for <a href="http://www.marinemammalcenter.org/education/marine-mammal-information/cetaceans/?referrer=https://www.google.co.uk/">60 million years</a> and which we have persecuted almost to extinction, says much about our own species. We should remember this when considering our continued penchant for fossil fuels.</p>
<p>That 19th century whale oil has lubricated our own voyage through an imagined and uncharted space that traverses land and sea, ocean floor to outer space. So when you watch In the Heart of the Sea, consider how it reflects upon our own behaviour in our continuing quest for dominion over nature and resource.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51685/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Angela Cockayne does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
The tale of the vengeful whale that took out the Essex, a whaling-ship, has now been adapted in true swashbuckling style.
Angela Cockayne, Reader in Art and Design, Bath Spa University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/51740
2015-12-09T19:12:21Z
2015-12-09T19:12:21Z
A necessary harvest: it’s time to allow Japan to kill whales
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/104980/original/image-20151209-3264-1mpapa6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Can Australians stomach a small, scientifically-sound whale harvest? </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Whale meat image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Last week Japan’s whaling fleet set sail for Antarctica again under its new scientific whaling program NEWREP-A. In 2014 the International Court of Justice <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&k=64&case=148&code=aj&p3=5">decided</a> that Japan’s previous program was not scientific. </p>
<p>But this year Japan <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/jurisdiction/index.php?p1=5&p2=1&p3=3&code=JP">renounced</a> its recognition of the court’s jurisdiction on whales, effectively ruling out <a href="https://theconversation.com/japans-whaling-fleet-sets-sail-again-and-theres-not-much-that-can-stop-it-51556">further legal challenges</a>. </p>
<p>Predictably, the <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/aust-boat-may-monitor-japanese-whaling/news-story/72696f4411c4fcd517477cf649711c91">Australian government</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2015/s4363762.htm">NGOs</a> have been quick to condemn the move.</p>
<p>I argue both countries are undermining science-based international environmental law. In essence, Australia and other prominent anti-whaling parties have long frustrated international efforts to resume sustainable whale harvests. Japan, prevented from taking a legitimate approach, cynically abuses research exemptions.</p>
<h2>Whale diplomacy</h2>
<p>Whaling is regulated under the <a href="https://archive.iwc.int/pages/view.php?ref=3607&k=">International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling</a>, administered by the International Whaling Commission (IWC). In 1982, members of the commission agreed to a moratorium on commercial whaling. Subsequent lobbying for a permanent whaling ban has always been opposed by countries such as Japan and Norway. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/104818/original/image-20151208-20451-1xt7k0f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/104818/original/image-20151208-20451-1xt7k0f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/104818/original/image-20151208-20451-1xt7k0f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=248&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104818/original/image-20151208-20451-1xt7k0f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=248&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104818/original/image-20151208-20451-1xt7k0f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=248&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104818/original/image-20151208-20451-1xt7k0f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104818/original/image-20151208-20451-1xt7k0f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/104818/original/image-20151208-20451-1xt7k0f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Members of the International Whaling Commission (in blue).</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Whaling_Commission#/media/File:International_Whaling_Commission_members.svg">Lokal_Profil/Wikimedia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Most Australians now don’t realise that the convention was set up “to provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry”. </p>
<p>Some legal academics <a href="https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexis.com/webcd/app?action=DocumentDisplay&crawlid=1&srctype=smi&srcid=3B15&doctype=cite&docid=29+Mich.+J.+Int%27l+L.+293&key=d618e50e87825a93a44e9ca2fb11dde3">have argued</a> that this purpose has transformed over time and is now something other than it was originally. But a significant minority of IWC parties support the treaty’s original purpose.</p>
<p>Two fundamental tenets of international law are firstly that states, having ratified a treaty, must apply it in good faith and not frustrate its purpose; and secondly, to interpret treaties in accordance with their ordinary meaning. </p>
<p>While some <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-31/ijc-japan-whaling-southern-ocean-scientific-research/5357416">celebrate the 2014 finding</a> that the Japanese scientific whaling program was not sufficiently scientific, some IWC parties <a href="https://archive.iwc.int/pages/search.php?search=%21collection72&k=">have criticised</a> Australia’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2010/s2837631.htm">outright refusal to contemplate a resumption of commercial whaling</a> as undermining the treaty itself.</p>
<p>The result is that the IWC is mired in dysfunction and acrimonious disagreement. Australia has legislated a massive whale sanctuary that <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-07/rothwell-a-lot-more-is-at-stake-than-just-whaling/5187542">cannot be enforced</a> since to do so would call into question Australia’s Antarctic claim; whales continue to be <a href="https://iwc.int/table_objection">hunted commercially by Norway and Iceland</a> (Iceland continues to hunt endangered fin whales) and Japan’s recent legal manoeuvring serves as an untimely reminder of the fact that international laws and institutions are only as strong as the respect paid them.</p>
<h2>The real dangers to whales</h2>
<p>For a generation, opposing domestic political considerations have focused debate and concern upon the few hundred minke whales hunted by the Japanese in the southern ocean. Meanwhile, more than <a href="https://iwc.int/entanglement">300,000 cetaceans die annually</a> from entanglement and ship strikes.</p>
<p>Noise and water pollution threaten many whale species. More whales <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-02/hundreds-of-whales-found-dead-in-chile/6993698">washed up dead this April in Patagonia</a> in an unexplained incident than Japan will capture in the southern ocean all summer. </p>
<p>Unmitigated climate change also poses a significant threat to whales, through the <a href="https://www.adelaide.edu.au/news/news81042.html">collapse of marine ecosystems</a> “from the top of the food chain down” and other climate-related impacts such as <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/20/science/australia-antarctica-krill-climate-change-ocean.html?_r=2">severe krill reductions</a>.</p>
<h2>Why are whales special?</h2>
<p>In an in-depth exploration of the whaling wars investigative journalist <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/latenightlive/saving-face-in-the-whale-wars/5897082">Sam Vincent explained</a> the symbolic place of whales in Australia. In a pre-enlightened past Australians brutally exploited whales. We then recognized their majesty and humanity (or, perhaps, super-humanity), and now we are among their strongest protective champions. </p>
<p>Of course, this version of our civilizing narrative is only animated because there remains an uncivilized oriental “other” determined to kill and eat the sacred whales.</p>
<p>Aggressively championing international whale protection is the lowest hanging political fruit in Australian environmental politics. It costs nothing, is opposed by no one and requires zero change.</p>
<p>In Japan whales carry a different significance. Just as it would be Australian political suicide to support a resumption of Japanese commercial whaling, Vincent reports it would be almost as damaging for any Japanese politician to voice anti-whaling sentiment. </p>
<p>This has little to do with parochial Japanese whale hunting or culinary traditions, but is driven by attacks from outsiders, such as Australia. It is not Japanese demand to eat whale meat that is the primary incentive to continue whaling, but instead the desire to not give in to foreign pressure. </p>
<p>This argument is detailed by <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13880290701229911">Japanese academics</a>, and supported by recent <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2015/s4363762.htm">Greenpeace Japan</a> statements. </p>
<h2>Allow whaling to end it</h2>
<p>A return to whaling is being considered by the IWC under a <a href="https://iwc.int/rmp">Revised Management Plan</a>, but talks have reached an impasse since 2007.</p>
<p>If Australia and other anti-whaling nations compromised, it could be a model for how science, law and international diplomacy can combine to solve major international environmental problems. </p>
<p>Certain whale species were hunted close to extinction. The International Whaling Commission was formed in 1946, but failed at initial regulatory attempts, so parties agreed to a moratorium. The species under threat were saved from over-hunting. </p>
<p>Now, armed with better data, is an opportunity for the international community to agree to a tightly-controlled commercial harvest of non-endangered whales, alongside a range of universally-supported conservation programs. </p>
<p>This would likely have two effects in Japan. It would firstly remove the primary incentive for Japanese public support for southern ocean whaling. </p>
<p>Secondly, without pretence as “scientific research” the whaling program will be subject to commercial imperatives. Given that it is <a href="http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/japan-let-them-eat-whale/">a loss-making taxpayer-subsidized exercise producing an increasingly unwanted product</a>, the likely outcome is that southern ocean whaling would cease altogether in due course.</p>
<p>All species, even whales, benefit from an international legal system characterised by respect, tolerance, compromise and cooperation. </p>
<hr>
<p><em>Justin will be on hand for an Author Q&A between 9 and 10am AEDT on Friday, December 11, 2015. Post your questions in the comments section below.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51740/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Justin Rose does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
The clash between Australia and Japan over whaling is undermining science-based environmental law.
Justin Rose, Adjunct Associate Professor, School of Law, University of the South Pacific and Adjunct Fellow, Australian Centre for Agriculture and Law, University of New England
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/51556
2015-12-01T01:12:17Z
2015-12-01T01:12:17Z
Japan’s whaling fleet sets sail again, and there’s not much that can stop it
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/103817/original/image-20151201-26578-qeq4jk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Japan will kill Minke Whales in the Southern Ocean under the new whaling program. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Whale image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Japan’s whaling fleet will <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-01/japan-resumes-whaling-in-southern-ocean/6988298">leave port</a> today to resume whaling in the Southern Ocean as part of its new scientific program, <a href="http://www.jfa.maff.go.jp/j/whale/">NEWREP-A</a>. </p>
<p>Under the new program, Japan will kill 333 minke whales each summer. This is down from 850 minke whales, 50 fin whales, and 50 humpback whales under the previous whaling program, JARPA II. Anti-whaling nations and non-government organisations have condemned the decision. </p>
<p>In 2014, the International Court of Justice <a href="https://theconversation.com/whaling-in-the-antarctic-japans-scientific-program-illegal-23824">ruled</a> that JARPA II was not “for the purposes of scientific research” after Australia and New Zealand challenged Japan’s whaling program </p>
<p>The decision was <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/international-court-of-justice-orders-japan-to-end-antarctic-whaling-20140401-35wb0.html">widely-lauded</a> as the end of whaling in the Antarctic. However, since the decision Japan has revised its program and decided to continue whaling in the Southern Ocean. </p>
<h2>Japan’s new whaling program</h2>
<p>Whaling is regulated under the <a href="https://iwc.int/convention">International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling</a>. Article VIII of the Whaling Convention allows for a country to issue permits to itself to undertake lethal scientific research.</p>
<p>The 2014 court judgment didn’t ban scientific whaling. It simply stated that the scientific whaling program, JARPA II, was not for the purposes of scientific research. This left open the option of a new scientific whaling program. </p>
<p>Following the decision, Japan announced a new scientific whaling proposal: “Proposed Research Plan for New Scientific Whale Research Program in the Antarctic Ocean” or NEWREP-A.</p>
<p>In February, an <a href="https://iwc.int/spw-scientific-review">expert panel</a> of the International Whaling Commission under the convention advised Japan that there was <a href="https://theconversation.com/killing-whales-for-science-japan-is-sent-back-to-the-drawing-board-40153">not enough detail</a> in the proposal to justify the program. Japan has now <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/environment/whale-watch/japan-gives-green-light-to-commence-whaling-in-the-antarctic-20151128-glacwl.html?skin=text-only">responded</a> that “it does not require any substantial changes to the contents of NEWREP-A”. It is on this platform that their whaling program will proceed. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.ifaw.org/australia/news/japan-urged-leave-its-harpoons-home-whaling-fleet-prepares-return-antarctic">response</a> to Japan’s action from those opposed to its program has been, and will remain, strong. Dr Nick Gales, Director of the Australian Antarctic Division, has <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-29/whaling-activists-say-australia-send-customs-ship-southern-ocean/6984350">stated</a> that Japan cannot make any credible claim that their program has any scientific validity. Given the lack of independent scientific support for NEWREP-A, and Japan’s response to the expert findings, there is a resounding feeling in the commentary so far that NEWREP-A is indeed <a href="https://www.thedodo.com/japan-new-whaling-campaign-827236545.html">“lipstick on a pig”</a>. </p>
<p>From a research perspective, many have argued and <a href="https://www.environment.gov.au/node/18361">demonstrated</a> (especially as new technologies are developing) that lethal scientific whaling is unnecessary. </p>
<h2>Can the whaling program be challenged?</h2>
<p>Japan would seem to be setting itself up for further confrontation, however it has taken steps to avoid another legal challenge. </p>
<p>In October this year, the country <a href="https://theconversation.com/japans-whaling-gambit-shows-its-time-to-strengthen-the-rule-of-science-in-law-49488">stated it would not accept the jurisdiction</a> of the International Court of Justice on marine living resources, meaning Japan will no longer consent to further cases about whaling being heard by that court.</p>
<p>In the JARPA II case, the <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&k=64&case=148&code=aj&p3=4">court stated</a> it is expected that Japan will take into consideration the judgment when issuing permits for any future whaling program. But Japan’s strict obligation to follow the ruling is limited to JARPA II. </p>
<p>The court, in its decisive clause, ruled that Japan:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>shall revoke any extant authorization, permit or licence to kill, take or treat whales in relation to JARPA II, and refrain from granting any further permits under Article VIII, paragraph 1, of the Convention, in pursuance of that programme.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, even though the court expected that its findings would be taken into account if any new permits for lethal scientific whaling were issued, there is little scope to challenge NEWREP-A because it is not the JARPA II program. And Japan is now exempt from the court’s jurisdiction on these matters. </p>
<h2>Other options?</h2>
<p>Australian domestic legal action is most likely to be futile. In a <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-18/federal-court-hands-kyodo-$1m-fine-to-japanese-whalers/6952508">recent case</a> in the Australian Federal Court, Japanese whaling company Kyodo was fined A$1 million for breaching an earlier injunction in Australia’s Whale Sanctuary. But Japan does not recognise the Australian Antarctic Territory’s exclusive economic zone, nor its Whale Sanctuary, and therefore does not recognise the jurisdiction of this ruling. </p>
<p>There has still been no decision from the International Whaling Commission to give a clear green light to scientific whaling. Even so, it is unlikely Japan would reverse its decision. The commission is a deeply riven organisation split along pro- and anti-whaling lines, and even though sentiment may be strongly against Japan’s actions, it does not have the explicit power to halt NEWREP-A. </p>
<p>Various groups and political parties have urged the Australian government to make strong diplomatic representations to Japan about the new whaling program. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/environment/whale-watch/japan-gives-green-light-to-its-whalers-20151128-glacwl">stated</a> that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Our position is standard, that we … strongly encourage Japan to cease its whaling operations in any time, in any season, in any year.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/18366503.2015.1101811">Australian governments</a> have a long history of stable engagement with Japan on this issue, and are unlikely to deviate from this platform by directly intervening in the country’s whaling activities. </p>
<p>The Australian Greens have <a href="http://peter-whish-wilson.greensmps.org.au/content/media-releases/japan%E2%80%99s-decision-recommence-whaling-caused-australian-government-weakness">called</a> for the government to send a patrol vessel south to shadow the whaling fleet and collect evidence of its activities. But without the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, it’s unlikely such an effort would be useful in bringing an action against Japan.</p>
<p>Change may also come from <a href="http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/10/14/national/researcher-aims-to-bust-myth-of-japans-whale-eating-culture/">Japan itself</a>. With dramatically fewer Japanese eating whale meat, and the expensive and heavily subsidised scientific whaling program already labelled by many as unnecessary and irrelevant in modern times, perhaps internal pressure will put an end to lethal whaling by Japan.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51556/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Japan’s whaling fleet will leave port today to resume whaling in the Southern Ocean as part of its new scientific program, NEWREP-A.
Tony Press, Adjunct Professor, Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems CRC, University of Tasmania
Indi Hodgson-Johnston, Lecturer, Tutor & PhD Candidate (Law), Institute for Marine & Antarctic Studies & Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems CRC, University of Tasmania
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/49512
2015-10-21T08:04:28Z
2015-10-21T08:04:28Z
Politics podcast: Sarah Hanson-Young on the plight of ‘Abyan’
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/99156/original/image-20151021-15414-na6mxl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In this interview, Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young calls on the government to appoint an independent advocate to protect the interests of the Somali woman known as “Abyan”, who is being held on Nauru. Michelle Grattan also probes Hanson-Young on the Greens’ electoral prospects following the ascension of Malcolm Turnbull to the prime ministership.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/49512/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
In this interview, Sarah Hanson-Young calls on the government to appoint an independent advocate to protect the interests of the Somali woman known as "Abyan", who is being held on Nauru.
Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/49488
2015-10-21T03:53:16Z
2015-10-21T03:53:16Z
Japan’s whaling gambit shows it’s time to strengthen the rule of science in law
<p>Earlier this week it was revealed that Japan has <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/japan-rejects-international-court-jurisidiction-over-whaling-20151018-gkc7rm.html">prevented the International Court of Justice</a> from hearing cases about its controversial whaling program. </p>
<p>The declaration follows the highly publicised <a href="https://theconversation.com/whaling-in-the-antarctic-japans-scientific-program-illegal-23824">2014 ruling</a> by the court that Japan’s previous scientific whaling program (JARPA II) was “not for the purposes of scientific research”, making it contrary to international law. Japan concluded JARPA II and announced a new program, <a href="https://theconversation.com/japans-new-whaling-program-is-a-small-win-for-whales-but-34420">NEWREP-A</a> which proposes to kill up to around 4,000 whales over 12 years, beginning this summer. </p>
<p>Japan’s declaration effectively stops the International Court of Justice reviewing or ruling on the legality of NEWREP-A in the future, unless Japan consents to a case being brought against it (hint: that’s incredibly unlikely).</p>
<h2>Is Japan’s action legal?</h2>
<p>Generally the International Court of Justice can only exercise its power <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/documents/?p1=4&p2=2#CHAPTER_II">if countries agree to its jurisdiction</a>. They may do this within a treaty, or agree to the court’s power generally, subject to specific limitations.</p>
<p>Japan’s <a href="https://treaties.un.org/Pages/Declarations.aspx?index=Japan&chapter=1&treaty=311">declaration</a> is in the latter category, accepting broad jurisdiction with the exception of “any dispute arising out of, concerning, or relating to research on, or conservation, management or exploitation of, living resources of the sea”. This is clearly tailored to the provisions of the <a href="https://iwc.int/convention">International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling</a>, but also excludes review by the court of its other fishing programs. </p>
<p>Japan’s declaration is therefore permitted by international law. It is also something other nations have done. In fact, Australia made a similar declaration in 2002, limiting the jurisdiction of the court over <a href="https://treaties.un.org/Pages/Declarations.aspx?index=Australia&chapter=1&treaty=311">resource disputes</a>. This was done <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MonashULawRw/2011/28.pdf">to block a potential court challenge</a> to exploitation of oil and gas reserves by Australian companies in contested areas of the Timor Sea. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://iwc.int/convention">International Convention of the Regulation of Whaling</a> regulates all forms of whaling and since 1982 has imposed a moratorium on commercial whaling. The exception is Article VIII which allows killing whales “for the purposes of scientific research” and which was the subject of the previous legal challenge against JARPA II in the International Court of Justice. </p>
<p>Japan’s declaration doesn’t affect previous rulings. However the court’s JARPA II ruling specifically avoided addressing questions of “<a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/148/18136.pdf">scientific merit or importance</a>” about whaling. Rather the court restricted its decision specifically to Japan’s justification for JARPA II, providing <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/JlLawInfoSci/2015/7.html">limited guidance</a> on how to demarcate between legitimate and illegitimate scientific claims in international law in the future. </p>
<p>The limited ruling, combined with Japan’s limitation on jurisdiction, means we are unlikely to be able to say whether, or when, killing whales in the name of science is truly legal or not. </p>
<h2>Weak law, weak science</h2>
<p>Japan’s actions (and indeed Australia’s) points to a wider problem in how international law manages the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_commons">global commons</a> - resources and regions outside of national jurisdiction, such as the open ocean, the deep sea floor, and Antarctica.</p>
<p>Global treaties have historically assumed that science is a matter of common interest (rather than individual, state interest) and therefore not the source of potential legal disputes. There has been an assumption that the achievement of that common interest will be promoted in a more open, and less prescribed, governance framework. Treaty makers have have historically treated science as a discipline which relies on disagreement and self-reform to advance, and hence there has been caution about drafting laws which might interfere with it, or limit its advancement. </p>
<p>This means commons treaties tended towards broad, non-prescriptive definitions of scientific research, leaving states to interpret and apply themselves as science grew and advanced, without interference from other bodies or authorities. While that approach may have been historically justified it is increasingly showing signs of strain. </p>
<p>Whaling is not the only scientific disagreement in contemporary international affairs. The near intractable disagreements about state obligations under the <a href="http://unfccc.int/2860.php">United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)</a> are a prime example of that.</p>
<p>Like the Whaling Convention, the UNFCCC is based around broadly defined scientific terminology which states are left to interpret and apply internally to themselves. Like the Whaling Convention, the UNFCCC contains no compulsory arbitration provisions.</p>
<p>Of the three states which produce more than half of the world’s carbon emissions (China, the United States and India), only India accepts the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice at all, but does so in a way that would <a href="https://treaties.un.org/Pages/Declarations.aspx?index=India&chapter=1&treaty=311">prevent the court from reviewing its obligations</a> under a climate change convention. This has effectively stymied attempts by small island states facing disastrous sea level rise to create certainty about the relationship between science and state obligations under that convention. </p>
<h2>Subjecting science to the rule of law</h2>
<p>While it is true that Japan may be exploiting an apparent loophole so are many states, including Australia. These matters have much further-reaching consequences than just whaling. </p>
<p>The problem Japan’s declaration highlights is not one of law, but one of philosophy; an arguably redundant philosophy which views science as something beyond state self interest and outside the core competency of international courts. Concerningly, this was a view reflected by the International Court of Justice in the <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/JlLawInfoSci/2015/7.html">whaling case</a> </p>
<p>Yet that view is not necessarily supported by contemporary scientific or legal practice. Journals use peer review to evaluate the scientific veracity of claims. Similarly, the World Trade Organisation (along with domestic courts) <a href="https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_e.htm">has a legal framework</a> to distinguish the better of two or more competing scientific claims. </p>
<p>Unlike most global commons regimes, the WTO operates on the assumption that scientific claims might be used to undermine the free-trade purposes of the regime and be the source of interstate conflict. Hence it <a href="https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/disp1_e.htm">sets out rules</a> to evaluate competing scientific claims, and mandates resolution of scientific disputes by an external body in a manner which cannot be avoided by declaration. </p>
<p>It is time we treated the global commons with the same deference we treat global trade and finance. </p>
<p>Japan’s actions serve to highlight the need to subject global commons governance to similar compulsory, objective, external arbitration mechanisms. If science really is the best device to govern such matters, then it must be given the legal traction required to allow it to govern in the first place.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/49488/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brendan Gogarty received funding for a project 'Resolving Scientific Disputes in the Global Common’ by the Governance and Implementation Research Group (GIRG) - which is now managed by the Institute for the Study of Social Change. </span></em></p>
Japan has effectively removed any legal challenges to its controversial whaling program, revealing a flaw in international law.
Brendan Gogarty, Law Lecturer, University of Tasmania
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/28700
2015-07-28T14:42:52Z
2015-07-28T14:42:52Z
Whatever our emotions tell us, not all whaling is the same
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53197/original/pdxjygff-1404745500.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The pilot whale hunt is still largely unchanged for hundreds of years.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Whaling_in_the_Faroe_Islands_in_August_2012.JPG">EileenSanda</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the <a href="http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/tm/tm117/">mid-20th century</a> pilot whaling still took place in many north Atlantic nations such as the US and Canada. Now, only the Faraoese have a dedicated pilot whale hunt, <a href="http://www.whaling.fo">the <em>grindadráp</em></a>. Many of us don’t like the idea of this.</p>
<p>I am a scientist. I do not profit from the pilot whale hunt nor do I have anything to gain by writing this article. Indeed, I risk retaliation from those that feel what I say departs from the accepted mantra.</p>
<p>I <a href="http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?as_q=&as_epq=&as_oq=dolphin+whale&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=%22d+lusseau%22&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5">study and work with dolphins and whales</a> and for a while I spent more time around dolphins than people. For no logical reason, these animals are special to me, and that they are hunted upsets me. But these are personal opinions which have no place in this debate – a debate that is too easily ruled by emotions.</p>
<h2>No conservation threat</h2>
<p>The Faroese catch around 900 pilot whales, actually a type of dolphin, every year. This catch level does not threaten the <a href="http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/9250/0">conservation status</a> of this population estimated to have more than 750,000 whales. Often forgotten or ignored is that an estimated <a href="http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/9250/0">several hundred</a> pilot whales from the same populations are drowned every year in the nets of our fishing fleets.</p>
<p>The scale of the Faroese pilot whale hunt is very different to the industrial whaling led by the UK and Norway during the 19th and 20th centuries which, in only 50 to 70 years, over-exploited whales in the Antarctic Ocean and drove them almost to extinction. Nor is it comparable to the commercial pilot whaling in Newfoundland from the 1950s and 1960s which over-exploited the stock. In comparison, the Faroese pilot whale hunt has continued for close to 1,000 years without over-exploitation, with records going back to <a href="http://heimabeiti.fo/default.asp?menu=71">1584</a>. </p>
<p>Since pilot whales are top predators in the north Atlantic, they accumulate levels of heavy metals and other pollutants that make their meat <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3417701/">hazardous to eat</a>. Yet the hunt is part of the <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14702540701854694">social fabric</a> of the islands, and the meat is eaten nevertheless.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53062/original/ypdh3cjb-1404485357.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53062/original/ypdh3cjb-1404485357.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53062/original/ypdh3cjb-1404485357.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53062/original/ypdh3cjb-1404485357.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53062/original/ypdh3cjb-1404485357.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53062/original/ypdh3cjb-1404485357.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53062/original/ypdh3cjb-1404485357.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The whale hunt – the Grindadrap – has been going on for centuries.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GrindadrapVestmanna17-06-1854.jpg">British Maria Expedition</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>No good way of killing</h2>
<p>The Faroese pilot whale hunt is a dramatic sight. The animals are driven close to the shore in shallow bays and slaughtered with knives and lances. It results in a lot of blood in the water, clearly visible from the shore where many often gather to watch.</p>
<p>The need for animals that we eat to be killed quickly and humanely is well understood and agreed. The pilot whale killing method was chosen to ensure that the whales die as <a href="http://www.nammco.no/assets/Publications/Hunting-Methods-Committee/Final-Report-Export-Group-meeting-assessing-hunting-methods-for-small-cetacean.pdf">quickly as possible</a>, considering all the factors in the hunt. </p>
<p>Killing an animal is not a pleasant business, be it a whale, a deer, or a chicken. However, all welfare issues considered, I do not see how the pilot whale hunt is different from non-stalking hunts for animals on land, many of which take place in countries where opponents to the whale hunt live. Time-to-death is kept as short as possible, even if sometimes it’s longer than we would like. One thing is certain: it’s much shorter than the time it takes a pilot whale to drown in a fishing net that we use to catch our daily fish.</p>
<p>The hunt itself is a different story. We have very recently stopped hunting foxes with dogs in the UK on <a href="https://www.gov.uk/hunting-and-the-law">welfare grounds</a>. Driving pilot whales into bays to kill them takes time and is not unlike the process of hunting with dogs, and I think it raises welfare questions that need to be discussed.</p>
<p>I personally have difficulties weighing these welfare questions against those raised by the industrial farming which generates most of the meat we consume in anti-whaling nations. Anyone that signs a petition to stop this hunt only to go home and roast a chicken that never saw daylight or moved much when it was reared is a hypocrite. Would it be more ethical of the Faroese to replace the wild-caught meat they have available to them with imported, industrially produced meat?</p>
<h2>Not all whaling is the same</h2>
<p>Many of the arguments against the Faroese <a href="http://iwc.int/aboriginal">subsistence whaling</a> should equally apply to the subsistence whaling that goes on in other countries, such as among the Inuit and Eskimo of the US and Canada and the Siberian peoples in Russia. One argument against subsistence hunting is that as the world develops, access to other food sources increases. But alternative food sources are as prevalent in these other countries as they are in the Faroe Islands. Yet the Intuit and Eskimo for example are <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/save-most-of-the-whales-greenpeace-now-supports-inuit-hunting-but-native-groups-still-wary">not subject to the same criticism</a>, and are even <a href="http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-08-11/successful-whale-hunt-northern-canada-revives-ancient-inuit-tradition">lauded for protecting their cultural traditions</a> – are Faroese traditions somehow less worthy of protection?</p>
<p>We need an unemotional public debate about all forms of whaling, and a commonly agreed definition of subsistence whaling, dietary or cultural, that is more tightly defined and less open to interpretation. The debate is too driven by emotions, with too many groups that stand to gain while whaling remains a Punch and Judy show. As Gandhi said: “Anger and intolerance are the enemies of correct understanding.”</p>
<p>We must never again allow whaling on an industrial scale. But I enjoy my venison and I have no problem with deer hunts. I am one of the millions of hypocrites that eat meat but cannot bear the idea of killing an animal myself. I eat tuna despite <a href="http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2010/04/13/rsbl.2010.0156.short">its health risks</a> – if I was born in the Faroe Islands, wouldn’t I equally enjoy my pilot whale?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/28700/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Lusseau is a member of the IUCN Species Survival Commission Cetacean Specialist Group and Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group. He was a member of the International Whaling Commission Scientific Committee from 2005 to 2013 primarily providing evidence and advise on whalewatching management.</span></em></p>
It’s difficult to talk about whaling without emotions getting in the way. But we must.
David Lusseau, Reader, University of Aberdeen
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/44970
2015-07-25T00:58:35Z
2015-07-25T00:58:35Z
The big comeback: it’s time to declare victory for Australian humpback whale conservation
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89458/original/image-20150723-22818-fvnyv1.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Humpback whale populations have leapt on both Australia's east and west coasts.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ari S. Friedlaender (under NMFS permit)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>When it comes to conservation, good news is pretty thin on the ground – and the ocean, for that matter. We have grown much more used to hearing about marine species that face extinction, decline or negative impacts than about those that are thriving. But if we are to avoid getting demoralised, conservation biology needs victories to celebrate. </p>
<p>So here’s one: the remarkable recovery of humpback whales that breed in Australian waters. Our <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.05.007">review of the available data</a>, published today in Marine Policy, suggests that humpback whale populations in Australian waters have recovered to the extent that we should consider downlisting them from the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=38">official list of threatened species</a>. </p>
<p>The humpback whale should be a cause for <a href="http://www.oceanoptimism.com/">optimism</a> and hope. It’s an important counterbalance to the seemingly relentless communication of marine conservation problems with little in the way of good news. We hope this kind of optimism will convince politicians and the public that conservation problems can indeed be solved, and to stay dedicated to making that happen.</p>
<h2>Turning the tide</h2>
<p>Australia has one of the highest rates of species extinction in the world. But despite this, the past decade has seen rare examples of animals that are <a href="http://bit.ly/1BYjDZZ">rebounding and thriving</a>.</p>
<p>Humpback whales are one such example. They are <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=38">listed as “vulnerable”</a> on Australia’s official list of threatened species, under the <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc">Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act</a>. </p>
<p>But <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.05.007">our review</a>, led by Michelle Bejder of <a href="http://www.bmtoceanica.com.au">BMT Oceanica</a> and based on the best available scientific data, suggests that humpback whales no longer need to be on the EPBC Act’s Threatened Species list. Both the east and west Australian populations of humpback whales have recovered substantially from the damage done in the commercial whaling era (roughly from 1912 to 1972).</p>
<p>As of 2012, Australia’s east coast humpback population was at 63% of the pre-whaling-era level. The west coast population had bounced back to 90%. Australian humpback whale populations are increasing at remarkable rates: 9% a year for the west coast population and 10% a year for the east coast – the fastest documented increases worldwide.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/Status%20Reviews/humpback_whale_sr_2015.pdf">recent global assessment</a> of humpback whales suggested that nine populations from around the world (including the east and west Australian populations) are no longer at risk of extinction. This is to be expected when exploitation through commercial whaling is replaced with conservation legislation (both in Australia and worldwide). Though we don’t quite fully understand the biological forces driving this extraordinary population increase, it’s fair to say that the removal of the dominant negative human pressure has been a huge factor. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89615/original/image-20150724-7573-15lbhti.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89615/original/image-20150724-7573-15lbhti.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89615/original/image-20150724-7573-15lbhti.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89615/original/image-20150724-7573-15lbhti.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89615/original/image-20150724-7573-15lbhti.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89615/original/image-20150724-7573-15lbhti.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=618&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89615/original/image-20150724-7573-15lbhti.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=618&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/89615/original/image-20150724-7573-15lbhti.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=618&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">On the rise: humpback whale populations are rebounding at a startling rate.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ari S. Friedlaender (under NMFS permit)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We believe that conservation biologists have a responsibility to protect species that are in peril by providing a sound, scientific basis for effective management. It therefore follows that we also have a responsibility to present information on recovering populations. The listing of threatened species under the EPBC Act is a dynamic process that is periodically assessed to determine the most appropriate management actions – so if species no longer needs to be on the list we should say so. </p>
<p>The future challenge will be to protect a marine environment that contains growing humpback whale populations and to develop alternative approaches to ecological sustainability. The history of environmental protection is based on saving depleted species, with <a href="http://bit.ly/1BYjDZZ">very little guidance on how to manage recovering and recovered ones</a>.</p>
<p>If humpback whales are downlisted from the threatened species list, the EPBC Act would still protect them from significant impacts because migratory species are deemed under the Act to be <a href="http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/what-is-protected">nationally significant</a>. Beyond Australia, the <a href="https://iwc.int/home">International Whaling Commission</a> manages the global moratorium on commercial whaling, which is essential for the humpback whales’ recovery to continue. </p>
<p>Management efforts must now balance the need to ensure humpback whale growth and recovery within a marine environment that is also expanding with industrial and exploration activities. There will be increases in interactions with ocean users, including acoustic disturbance from noise, collisions with vessels, entanglements in fishing gear, habitat destruction from coastal development, and interactions with the whale-watching industry. It will be vital to gain public support to help maintain the growth and recovery of Australian humpback whales and prevent future population declines. </p>
<h2>Ocean optimism</h2>
<p>The recovered humpback whale population could bring a positive shift in scientific research throughout Australia. If Australian humpback whales are removed from the list of threatened species, one of the most beneficial consequences could be the reprioritisation of research and funding to support other species that are at a greater risk. </p>
<p>Hopefully, other animal species such as the threatened blue whale, the understudied Australian snubfin and Australian humpback dolphins might get the same chance of scientific scrutiny that has been afforded to humpback whales. </p>
<p>For the first time in more than a generation, Australia’s iconic humpback whales have become a symbol of both hope and optimism for marine conservation, providing a unique opportunity to celebrate successful scientific and management actions that protect marine species. Optimism in conservation biology (which even has its own social media hashtag, <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23oceanoptimism&src=typd">#OceanOptimism</a>) is essential to encourage politicians and the public to solve conservation problems. </p>
<p>Around the world, many marine mammal populations remain in peril, and conservation biologists should not detract from these cases. But we should still highlight the successes, as they provide hope that ongoing conservation actions can prevail. Ultimately, inspirational examples such as humpback whales can motivate people to use ocean resources wisely and to take sustainable and effective actions to safeguard marine wildlife for the future. </p>
<p><em>This article was written with the assistance of Michelle Bejder, a marine science consultant with <a href="http://www.bmtoceanica.com.au">BMT Oceanica</a> and lead author of the <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.05.007">Marine Policy review</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/44970/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lars Bejder has received funding from the Australian Marine Mammal Centre (AMMC), the Western Australian Marine Science Institute (WAMSI) and the Western Australian Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPAW) and WWF-Australia.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joshua Smith has received research funding from the Australian Marine Mammal Centre, the Western Australian Marine Science Institution, and the International Fund for Animal Welfare.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ari Friedlaender and David Johnston do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Chalk it up as a rare conservation win: humpback whales have bounced back so strongly since the whaling era that there is no longer a need to include them on Australia’s official threatened species list.
Lars Bejder, Professor, Cetacean Research Unit, Murdoch University, Murdoch University
Ari Friedlaender, Associate Professor, Marine Mammal Institute, Oregon State University
David Johnston, Assistant Professor, Marine Conservation Ecology, Duke University
Joshua Smith, Postdoctoral Researcher, Murdoch University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/40153
2015-04-14T07:01:21Z
2015-04-14T07:01:21Z
Killing whales for science: Japan is sent back to the drawing board
<p>Japan’s latest proposal to resume whaling in the Antarctic has been <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/14/experts-reject-japans-new-whaling-plan">rejected</a> by an expert panel set up by the <a href="https://iwc.int/home">International Whaling Commission</a>, which regulates whaling and whale conservation. </p>
<p>The panel found that “the present proposal contains insufficient information for the Panel to complete a full review”. </p>
<p>Japan’s new program, <a href="http://www.jfa.maff.go.jp/j/whale/pdf/newrep--a.pdf">NEWREP-A </a> (New Scientific Whale Research Program in the Antarctic Ocean), proposed killing up to 333 minke whales each year until 2027. </p>
<p>Unlike Japan’s previous whaling program, JARPA II, only Antarctic minke whales are targeted, and there is some increased effort in “non-lethal” research methods. But the core of the proposed program centres on the lethal sampling of minke whales. </p>
<p>Among Japan’s <a href="http://www.jfa.maff.go.jp/j/whale/pdf/outline-of-newrep-a.pdf">justifications for the level of lethal sampling</a> in its proposed program is the statement that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>As there is no other means than lethal methods, at this stage, the use of lethal method is indispensable to obtain age data which is necessary for estimating the age-at-sexual maturity" </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This, Japan states, is important for estimating how many whales can be taken each year if commercial harvesting resumes. </p>
<h2>Whales in court</h2>
<p>There are 88 countries in the International Whaling Commission under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, which placed a moratorium on commercial whaling in 1982.</p>
<p>However, member countries are allowed to issue permits to themselves to kill whales for scientific research; and Norway and Iceland continue to take whales commercially, having lodged formal objections to the commercial whaling moratorium. </p>
<p>Japan’s latest proposal to kill whales was reviewed by an expert panel of scientists established under the scientific committee of the International Whaling Commission. Its role was to evaluate the proposed new research program “in the light of [its] stated objectives”. The expert panel’s findings will be discussed at the forthcoming meeting of the scientific committee. Ultimately, though, it will be up to Japan whether it accepts the recommendations or not.</p>
<p>The current finding is particularly significant, because it mirrors the judgment of the International Court of Justice when it <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/148/18136.pdf">ruled against Japan’s previous whaling program</a>, JARPA II, in April 2014. </p>
<p>Then the court ruled that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The court concludes that the special permits granted by Japan for the killing, taking and treating of whales in connection with JARPA II are not “for purposes of scientific research”. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>JARPA II was Japan’s lethal scientific whaling program that ran from 2005 until the ruling of the International Court of Justice in 2014. In JARPA II Japan had proposed to kill 850 Antarctic minke whales per year.</p>
<p>In its ruling the court was very critical of Japan’s justifications for the sample sizes it had established in the JARPA II whaling program, and the need to undertake lethal whaling on the scale set. It found that Japan provided insufficient information to justify the numbers of humpback, fin and minke whales to be killed. </p>
<p>Other parts of the judgement are also critical of the absence of evidence to justify different for components of the Japanese whaling program. </p>
<p>Having ruled that the JARPA II program was illegal under international law, the court provided, toward the end of its judgement, a cautionary note: </p>
<p>“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”. </p>
<h2>Back to the drawing board</h2>
<p>The expert panel was also unconvinced by Japan’s arguments for lethal sampling in the new proposal, finding: </p>
<p>“with the information presented in the proposal, the Panel was not able to determine whether lethal sampling is necessary to achieve the … major objectives; therefore, the current proposal does not demonstrate the need for lethal sampling to achieve those objectives”.</p>
<p>In short, the expert panel has sent Japan back to the drawing board, at least with respect to justifying its proposed lethal whaling program in the Antarctic.</p>
<p>The expert panel’s recommendations, if adopted by the International Whaling Commission, and agreed to by Japan, would require Japan to undertake extensive further work on their proposal, especially in order to justify the killing of whales for the scientific research it proposes. </p>
<p>This work would include not only better justifying sample sizes in the program, but also why lethal sampling is required when non-lethal methods, such as biopsy sampling, is currently available. </p>
<p>Japan’s Commissioner to the International Whaling Commission, Joji Morishita, has <a href="http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_JAPAN_WHALING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT">been quoted as saying</a> “we hope to work toward a resumption (of research whaling) at the end of the year”. But convincing opponents to Japan’s whaling program will not be easy.</p>
<p>The killing of whales for scientific research has been, at least for the past three decades, at the heart of international opposition to Japan’s whaling program in the Antarctic. Modern research techniques, such as <a href="http://www.antarctica.gov.au/news/2015/scholarship-to-study-dna-clues-of-whale-age">those developed in Australia</a>, appear to be closing the door on many of Japan’s arguments for lethal whaling in the name of science.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/40153/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tony Press has previously received funding from the Australian Government's Cooperative Research Centres Program.</span></em></p>
Japan’s proposed new program to kill whales for science has been rejected by an international expert panel.
Tony Press, Adjunct Professor, Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems CRC, University of Tasmania
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/34420
2014-11-20T00:24:22Z
2014-11-20T00:24:22Z
Japan’s new whaling program is a small win for whales, but…
<p>This week, Japan announced a research plan for its <a href="http://www.jfa.maff.go.jp/j/whale/">New Scientific Whale Research Program in the Antarctic Ocean</a>, to replace previous programs. </p>
<p>In March this year, Japan’s previous whaling program, JARPA II, was deemed “not for the purposes of scientific research” by the <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=3&code=aj&case=148&k=64&p3=0">International Court of Justice</a>. It was therefore illegal under the <a href="https://archive.iwc.int/pages/view.php?ref=3607&k=">International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling</a>, a law developed by members of the <a href="http://iwc.int/home">International Whaling Commission</a>, including Australia and Japan. </p>
<p>The convention and commission are charged with conserving whales and managing the commercial whaling industry. </p>
<p>Compared to previous programs, Japan’s new whaling program is spread across a larger area of the ocean around the Antarctic, but will kill fewer whales. It has been submitted to the commission and its <a href="http://iwc.int/scmain">scientific committee</a>. However, Japan doesn’t have to wait for any sort of approval from these bodies.</p>
<p>In response to the announcement, Greens Senator Peter Whish-Wilson has called for the Australian government to back up the court judgment and <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national/tasmania/greens-hit-tony-abbotts-silence-on-whaling-after-japan-announced-plans-to-catch-333-minkes/story-fnn32rbc-1227128169354">“pile on diplomatic pressure”</a>.</p>
<h2>What did the court say?</h2>
<p>The court did not rule, for example, that Japan must “<a href="http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/11/19/national/japans-called-research-whaling-program-faces-uncertain-future/#.VGxvHtZF4lh">end its research whaling in the Antarctic Ocean</a>” indefinitely, as the ruling of illegality applied <em>only</em> to the JARPA II program. Nor did it ban scientific whaling completely.</p>
<p>The court’s decision was based on interpretation of “for the purposes of” within article VIII of the convention, which allows for lethal scientific whaling. </p>
<p>The phrase was interpreted to mean that a research program’s design and implementation <em>must be reasonable in relation to its stated objectives</em>. No definition of scientific research was given. </p>
<p>So what does this mean for whales and the whaling debate? </p>
<h2>What’s in the new program?</h2>
<p>The new program is scheduled to start in the 2015/16 southern summer and will span 12 years. In accordance with the judgment, the program will need to be reasonably designed and implemented to achieve these two main objectives:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Improve biological and ecological data on Antarctic minke whales. This will increase the precision of biological and ecological information for the application of the <a href="http://iwc.int/rmp">Revised Management Procedure</a> to the Antarctic minke whale. </p></li>
<li><p>Investigation of the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem through building ecosystem models. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>Japan will kill whales only if non-lethal methods, such as data-loggers and biopsy sampling, fail to achieve the stated objectives. Should this happen, the annual lethal sample is capped at <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/18/japan-cuts-antarctic-whale-quota-after-un-court-ruling">a dramatically reduced</a> 333 Antarctic minke whales, compared with 850 under JARPA II. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/2480/0">IUCN has stated</a> that the Antarctic minke whale is “data deficient”, meaning more research needs to be done to determine its population status. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/64948/original/image-20141119-16191-19bno66.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/64948/original/image-20141119-16191-19bno66.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/64948/original/image-20141119-16191-19bno66.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/64948/original/image-20141119-16191-19bno66.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/64948/original/image-20141119-16191-19bno66.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/64948/original/image-20141119-16191-19bno66.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=710&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/64948/original/image-20141119-16191-19bno66.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=710&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/64948/original/image-20141119-16191-19bno66.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=710&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">NEWREP-A Research Area (Areas III - VI).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Australian Antarctic Data Centre (altered by Indi Hodgson-Johnston)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The geographical scope for research is now extended across a wider area of the Southern Ocean (<a href="http://www.jfa.maff.go.jp/j/whale/">NEWREP-A, Section 3.1</a>), which overlaps with the Whaling Commission’s Whale Sanctuary. </p>
<p>However, because Japan doesn’t formally recognise the sanctuary for minke whales (it does for other whale species), this doesn’t deem the possible lethal sampling “illegal”. </p>
<p>The plan also offers solutions to other criticisms levelled at the JARPA II program by the court, including invitations for the participation of foreign scientists and institutions, especially those involved with the scientific committee. </p>
<h2>Is it scientific?</h2>
<p>From a legal perspective, the research plan appears fastidiously tailored to address the complete scope of the court’s judgment and to justify its scientific objectives.</p>
<p>The language used is far more legal and Western in style than JARPA II and other reports produced by the <a href="http://www.icrwhale.org/eng-index.html">Institute for Cetacean Research</a>, which is understandable given the scrutiny the program will attract. </p>
<p>Both sides of the whaling debate have used their own interpretations of scientific research from the judgment in support of their cause. A <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/345/6201/1125.summary">Science Magazine article</a> suggests using the judgment within the scientific committee as a yardstick for deciding between what is science and what is not. </p>
<p>Japan’s new program has also used the words of the judgment almost verbatim to justify Japan’s research position, objectives and possible use of lethal methods. </p>
<h2>Reaction from anti-whaling groups</h2>
<p>Anti-whaling countries and organisations have been quick to cast judgement on the plan. Dr Phil Clapham, of the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration and author of a <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X14002279">recent Marine Policy article</a> on whaling, has stated that the new program is “<a href="https://www.thedodo.com/japan-new-whaling-campaign-827236545.html">all lipstick on a pig</a>”. </p>
<p>The Australian Environment Minister has promised to <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/19/australian-government-to-scrutinise-new-japanese-whaling-plan?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter">scrutinise the plan</a>, which has been labelled as something that does not <a href="http://news.sciencemag.org/asiapacific/2014/11/japans-new-plan-research-whaling-calls-killing-333-minke-whales-annually">sufficiently reflect</a> the findings of the court. </p>
<p>Anti-whaling countries and organisations have few, if any, purely legal avenues to stop this program going ahead.</p>
<p>Australia could take Japan to court again, but as Professor Timothy Stephens states, the current government “<a href="http://news.sciencemag.org/asiapacific/2014/11/japans-new-plan-research-whaling-calls-killing-333-minke-whales-annually">is not especially keen to push the whaling question</a>”. </p>
<p>Direct action by environmental activists such as the <a href="http://www.seashepherdglobal.org/">Sea Shepherd Conservation Society</a> is likely to resume, despite condemnation of the society’s actions in the judgment. In disrupting a legally justified Japanese program, Sea Shepherd may find itself in contravention of various laws of the sea, as well as marine pollution and collision regulations.</p>
<h2>Do the rules need to change?</h2>
<p>Answers to the debate lie squarely with the Whaling Commission and its Scientific Committee. They must begin discussions on the use of the judgment to <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/new-zealand-follows-australias-lead-to-prevent-japan-from-whaling-again-in-the-southern-ocean-20140731-3cvhw.html">dictate boundaries of scientific research and discourse</a> and review the object and purpose of the convention and the commission. </p>
<p>The text of the Whaling Convention can only be changed by consensus. That makes it a stubborn beast that will never fit the expectations of either pro or anti-lethal scientific whaling countries. </p>
<p>In the meantime, Japan is following the judgment using reasonable legal interpretation, while the pledges of environmental activists to disrupt the season are predictable in their vehemence. </p>
<p>However, the solution to the ongoing whaling war does not lie in the interpretation of the judgment, in court, or even at sea. Instead, it almost certainly lies with the Whaling Commission, the IWC Scientific Committee and their founding laws.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/34420/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Indi Hodgson-Johnston is affiliated with and receives scholarship funding from the University of Tasmania and the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Julia Jabour has received funding from the Australian Research Council and is a contributed researcher to the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre.</span></em></p>
This week, Japan announced a research plan for its New Scientific Whale Research Program in the Antarctic Ocean, to replace previous programs. In March this year, Japan’s previous whaling program, JARPA…
Indi Hodgson-Johnston, PhD candidate in International Law, University of Tasmania
Julia Jabour, Senior Lecturer, Ocean and Antarctic Governance Research Program, University of Tasmania
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/31351
2014-09-08T20:25:06Z
2014-09-08T20:25:06Z
Japan could resume whaling – this time with The Hague’s blessing
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/58432/original/ns7bjss5-1410157434.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=3%2C14%2C2485%2C1642&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Japan's whaling program was defeated in The Hague, but that might not stop more whales being taken in the future.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Tim Watters/Sea Shepherd Australia/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Japan is reportedly set to release <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/04/japan-diplomatic-row-bypassing-whaling-ban-antarctic">plans to resume killing whales in the Southern Ocean</a> in the 2015-16 season. </p>
<p>It seems like a defiant move, coming just six months after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) <a href="http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/148/18160.pdf">ruled</a> that Japan’s scientific whaling program violated the <a href="http://iwc.int/private/downloads/1r2jdhu5xtuswws0ocw04wgcw/convention.pdf">1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling</a> – a decision hailed as a resounding victory for the Australian-led legal challenge to the program. </p>
<p>But the judgment, emphatic though it was, does not completely close the loophole in the convention that allows whaling for scientific purposes. If Japan can come up with a proposal that satisfies the conditions laid down by the court, there may be no barrier to it beginning whaling again. </p>
<h2>Why did Japan lose the court case?</h2>
<p>In a <a href="http://theconversation.com/whaling-in-the-antarctic-japans-scientific-program-illegal-23824">decisive judgment</a> that surprised many observers, the ICJ found that Japan’s Southern Ocean scientific whaling program (known as JARPA II) did not meet the whaling convention’s requirements. The court found (by 12 votes to 4) that Japan’s activities were not covered by Article VIII of the convention, which allows whaling for scientific purposes. It therefore found Japan to be in breach of bans on commercial whaling and the use of factory ships.</p>
<p>The court did not say that scientific whaling in general is unlawful, stressing that scientific programs can be pursued for reasons besides conservation or sustainable exploitation of whale stocks. The court was at pains to stay away from contested areas of whale conservation politics, observing that its role was not to deal with these issues but instead was only to examine whether Japan’s scientific whaling program met the requirements of Article VIII.</p>
<p>The court separated Article VIII into two parts, focusing first on whether Japan’s whaling program was scientific, and then on whether it was conducted primarily for scientific purposes. It was only on the latter count that Japan was found wanting.</p>
<p>The court did not venture a view as to what science is (despite some fascinating debate in the courtroom on this point between Australia and Japan). After reviewing Japan’s stated scientific objectives for its Antarctic whale hunt, the court said that “the JARPA II activities involving the lethal sampling of whales can broadly be characterized as ‘scientific research’”. </p>
<p>When I was live-calling the judgment on ABC News 24, my initial reaction was that this meant that Australia had lost its case. However, as the judgment continued, it soon transpired that the court was not convinced that Japan was matching its apparently lofty scientific goals with a method that was actually fit for purpose.</p>
<p>The court was not convinced that Japan had given full and reasonable explanations for its planned sample sizes (850 minke whales, 50 fin whales, and 50 humpback whales) and the enormous variation in the actual numbers of whales taken each season. The evidence suggested that the sample sizes were quite arbitrary, and not really directed at achieving Japan’s scientific objectives, which were to: </p>
<ul>
<li>monitor the Antarctic ecosystem</li>
<li>model competition among whale species and future management objectives</li>
<li>work out temporal and spatial changes in whale population structure</li>
<li>improve management of minke whale stocks. </li>
</ul>
<p>The take of a reduced number of minke and fin whales, and no humpback whales at all, was found to be a function of political and logistical considerations, rather than scientific ones. In sum, the court found that there was no reasonable relationship between Japan’s planned scientific program and the way it did the whaling.</p>
<h2>What will Japan do now?</h2>
<p>After unsuccessfully challenging the court’s jurisdiction, Japan <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/japan-will-abide-by-courts-whaling-decision-20140331-35ull.html">indicated</a> that it would abide by the ruling. This might be because the Japanese government <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/08/tony-abbott-urged-to-raise-whaling-concerns-with-shinzo-abe">believes</a> it can continue whaling in <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/environment/whale-watch/japanese-whalers-plan-new-antarctic-hunt-20140412-36jnf.html">one form or another</a> while still complying with the conditions set by the court.</p>
<p>Japan is now reportedly preparing to submit fresh plans to the IWC’s general meeting in Slovenia this month, and to the commission’s scientific committee in November. The Whaling Convention allows parties to draw up scientific whaling plans unilaterally, so there is nothing in international law stopping Japan going ahead without the IWC’s blessing. </p>
<p>However, it is clear from the court’s judgment that a major reason for Japan’s loss is that it failed over many years to engage constructively with the IWC and to explain the reasoning behind its whaling program.</p>
<p>The issue also hinges on whether Japan can conceive of a new Antarctic whaling program that matches the criteria set by the court. The court did not set specific limits on the number or species of whale that Japan could legitimately target, simply ruling that the sample sizes needed to be “reasonable”. </p>
<p>Japan might therefore decide to take a two-pronged approach for its new program: first, it could set less ambitious scientific objectives; and second, it could seek to take fewer whales. The dilemma is that a very small sample may not be scientifically valid, yet a very large one could set off yet another round of international recrimination. Moreover, a very small take of whales would be harder to justify economically, given the <a href="http://thediplomat.com/2014/08/japanese-whaling-the-saga-continues">enormous cost</a> of the program.</p>
<h2>Will Australia oppose it again?</h2>
<p>When he was opposition leader, Tony Abbott <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/national/abbott-rejects-whaling-legal-bid-20100111-m2oe.html">said</a> that a Coalition government would not take Japan to the ICJ to challenge its scientific whaling hunt. However, he did not oppose the Rudd government’s decision to begin the proceedings. </p>
<p>When the ruling was handed down, Mr Abbott, who had become prime minister in the meantime, chose <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/tony-abbotts-caution-has-let-japanese-whaling-off-the-hook-20140710-3bp7p.html">not to capitalise</a> on the judgment by pressing Japan to phase out lethal whaling altogether. This amounted to a green light for Japan to revamp its plans. </p>
<p>Yet the Abbott government, like its predecessor, is right to resist calls to enforce Australian laws against whaling in Antarctica, given Antarctica’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-07/rothwell-a-lot-more-is-at-stake-than-just-whaling/5187542">special status</a>.</p>
<p>There is sure to be continued wrangling within the IWC on any new Antarctic whaling plans by Japan. If Japan does go ahead with a new hunt that is at odds with the ICJ’s ruling, the pressure will be back on the Abbott government to come up with an effective response. All options will need to be kept on the table, including a possible reactivation of the case in the ICJ. </p>
<p>Japan may yet devise a plan that abides by the court’s ruling. Yet even it if doesn’t, given Mr Abbott’s reluctance to press home Australia’s advantage back in March, it seems unlikely the issue will go all the way to The Hague again.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/31351/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Stephens receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He has provided advice to the International Fund for Animal Welfare in relation to whale conservation.</span></em></p>
Japan is reportedly set to release plans to resume killing whales in the Southern Ocean in the 2015-16 season. It seems like a defiant move, coming just six months after the International Court of Justice…
Tim Stephens, ARC Future Fellow, University of Sydney
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.