Sea Shepards ram Japanese whaling ship

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: spikespiegal
Spare me the emotional rants about whales - I've personally been to slaughterhouses and seen what we do to cows with air hammers.

apples and oranges. cows are farmed for food. yes they are farmed since they are bred under controlled conditions by humans. whales reproduce naturally in the wild where humans have no control of the situation.

Ok, what about other types of fish? You like lobster or crap? Tuna? Salmon?

Should we ban all non-farm raised foods?

sustainable fishing. lobster, crab, tuna, and salmon have much higher population numbers and thus reproduce at a much higher rate than whales. Also those industries are much more established and have regular studies to determine fish stock so that sustainable fishing can be practiced. It is in their own interest to practice sustainable fishing since once that species is gone, so is one of their income sources. As stated in the time article linked earlier in this thread, the japanese themselves admitted going over their quota for Bluefin tuna. So they knowingly overfish.

Also, according to the same article, "Japanese consumption has become so negligible that local governments are encouraging schools to incorporate whale in their lunch programs, while thousands of tons of whale meat remain stockpiled in freezers." So the demand isnt there, but the Japanese are hunting for the sake of tradition.

yep - tradition that was born out of need that no longer exists.

1) all fish that we eat, are either farmed, or are fish found in massive quantities. Plus, they are easier to control, because they breed in massive numbers - whales do not. Overfishing does happen, but cutting back for a few years tends to be all that is necessary to bring the numbers back into the range they prefer.

2) the other things we eat, the insects of the sea, like lobster, crab, shrimp, are equally as plentiful, equally as farmable, and equally as easy to control population.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

I will note that the stated purpose of the ICW was to "provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry". IOW, its an industry organization whose purpose was to study and regulate the commercial harvesting of whales with the ultimate goal being sustainability, not out-right bans. However, it is indisputable that anti-whaling countries whose populations did not prefer whale products came to dominate control of the ICW and turned it into an anti-whaling advocacy group.

It would be like creating a commission to regulate the salmon industry for sustainability then stacking it with PETA nutwhacks and vegans.

Wow, you are actually trying to make that comparison?

It would be like creating a commission to regulate the salmon industry for sustainability then stacking it with PETA nutwhacks and vegans, and then AGREEING to follow it. And then the next year you kill 500,000 salmon for "research".

Whether whales are actually endangered or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the Japanese were a part of the treaty that banned whaling, and here they are performing "research" in a clear violation to that treaty. If the agreement was so stupid and pointless, why did the Japanese agree to it in the first place? If the treaty is outdated and should be removed, then perhaps the Japanese should work on you know, removing it. Killing whales for "research" in blatant disregard to a treaty they agreed to follow is immoral and dishonest.

 

[DamnRena]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ce2_1200889043

rofl rofl rofl

 

[apaflo]

Originally posted by: FelixDeKat
Oh no! The Japanese are killing thousands of whales for millions of dollars in profit

The Japanese Whale Research Program operates at a loss, and is subsidized by the Japanese government. The "profit" does not cover the cost of operations.

Incidentally, a number of posters to this thread have claimed that the research is illegal and in violation of the treaty, which is not true at all.

The International Whaling Commission (IWC) was established by the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW, a 1946 treaty) to develop a management plan providing quotas for whaling. The IWC has been virtually non-functional for decades (for complex reasons that are very interesting, but the description is too long for this article). The IWC instituted a ban on commercial whaling 30 some years ago, claiming there was not enough valid research data available to generate the management plan.

The Japanese instituted a research program to provide that data. If the research is no longer needed then the IWC has no valid reason to delay implementing the (already completed) management plan.

The point that needs to be made though is that Japan is operating precisely (as is Norway, though in a different way) under the restraints of the treaty. Article 8 of the treaty says:

1. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Convention, any Contracting Government may grant to any of its nationals a special permit authorizing that national 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, and the killing, taking, and treating of whales in accordance with the provisions of this Article shall be exempt from the operation of this Convention. Each Contracting Government shall report at once to the Commission all such authorizations which it has granted. Each Contracting Government may at any time revoke such special permit which it has granted.

2. Any whales taken under these special permits shall so far as practicable be processed and the proceeds shall be dealt with in accordance with directions issued by the Government by which the permit was granted.

While the Japanese research is quite good, they are often accused of being a front for commercial whaling. That is a false claim that is the more ignominious because it was manufactured by the US... which as it happens actually did continue hunting Sperm whales for the oil (required by the military until a synthetic replacement was developed) under the guise of a research permit for a few years after the ban was first implemented.

 

[Kirby]

Originally posted by: apaflo

Originally posted by: FelixDeKat
Oh no! The Japanese are killing thousands of whales for millions of dollars in profit

The Japanese Whale Research Program operates at a loss, and is subsidized by the Japanese government. The "profit" does not cover the cost of operations.

Incidentally, a number of posters to this thread have claimed that the research is illegal and in violation of the treaty, which is not true at all.

The International Whaling Commission (IWC) was established by the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW, a 1946 treaty) to develop a management plan providing quotas for whaling. The IWC has been virtually non-functional for decades (for complex reasons that are very interesting, but the description is too long for this article). The IWC instituted a ban on commercial whaling 30 some years ago, claiming there was not enough valid research data available to generate the management plan.

The Japanese instituted a research program to provide that data. If the research is no longer needed then the IWC has no valid reason to delay implementing the (already completed) management plan.

The point that needs to be made though is that Japan is operating precisely (as is Norway, though in a different way) under the restraints of the treaty. Article 8 of the treaty says:

1. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Convention, any Contracting Government may grant to any of its nationals a special permit authorizing that national 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, and the killing, taking, and treating of whales in accordance with the provisions of this Article shall be exempt from the operation of this Convention. Each Contracting Government shall report at once to the Commission all such authorizations which it has granted. Each Contracting Government may at any time revoke such special permit which it has granted.

2. Any whales taken under these special permits shall so far as practicable be processed and the proceeds shall be dealt with in accordance with directions issued by the Government by which the permit was granted.

While the Japanese research is quite good, they are often accused of being a front for commercial whaling. That is a false claim that is the more ignominious because it was manufactured by the US... which as it happens actually did continue hunting Sperm whales for the oil (required by the military until a synthetic replacement was developed) under the guise of a research permit for a few years after the ban was first implemented.

That's one hell of a first post. 😕

 

[apaflo]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: tcsenter
Harvest of any animal or resource has merit so long as there is a single person on earth who benefits from it or desires to do it.

The stated objective of the ban, however, was specifically to protect species that were (reportedly) on the brink of extinction due to unsustainable commercial harvest. And I support such measures, so long as the species in question is in fact endangered and/or the commercial harvest is in fact unustainable. The whales being hunted aren't and the rates of commercial harvest aren't = game over. The only thing that leaves is emotional attachment.

the japanese are harvesting upwards of 1k whales per year--this one ship alone, I believe.

It's obvious you know nothing about sustainable whale populations--in the sense of the worldwide ecosystem managing to sustain such massive creatures--so I'll assume you pulled that statement out of your ass.

I've just read through this entire thread, and will have to admit that I did see exactly one (count it, just one) error by tcsenter. It was an error of ommission though, as he probably knows and should have commented on the fact that whale research is part of the ICRW treaty and not a matter of regulation by the IWC.

Otherwise, every single post I saw by tcsenter was exactly accurate. No other user came close. (And frankly, the moderator here is an idiot.)

 

[apaflo]

Originally posted by: nkgreen
That's one hell of a first post. 😕

Kind words; thank you!

In the interest of full disclosure I should point out that I live in Barrow Alaska and have had the the topic of Japanese research whaling (as well as commercial whaling and Eskimo subsistence whaling) on my agenda for many years. I personally know real live whale biologists, real live whale hunters, as well as mothers who feed whale to their children, and (horror of horrors...) I even eat whale now and then myself!

I don't mind friendly discussion; but for those who want to be disagreeable my suggestion is get your facts straight before you post! 🙂

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: Aharami
i've noticed this from most of the pro-whaling/anti sea-shepherd crowd here. They generally use tamer words to hide that fact that the Japanese are hunting and killing gentle giants of the sea.

Oh that's funny. I prove that harvest is standard terminology used by wildlife agencies and biologists, yet you use emotional drivel such as "gentle giants" when referring to animals that are nothing more than marine ruminants.

Look, I get why some people want to hump (form an emotional attachment to) certain types of animals. I think whales are cute, too. But one culture's "oh its so pretty and majestic I want to hump it" is another culture's dinner.

If you're vegan, then you can preach about the evils of eating mammals or whatever without being an arrogant hypocrite. But if you're not vegan, and do eat animals or wear their hides (as I do), then positing that its OK for you to utilize some types of animals but other cultures are immoral when they utilize some other different types of animals just because you happen to "like" them is arrogant and hypocritical.

 

[sourceninja]

Well when the Japanese bring about the end of the world and kurk isn't here to help us then what are you going to do??

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: tcsenter
Look, I get why some people want to hump (form an emotional attachment to) certain types of animals. I think whales are cute, too. But one culture's "oh its so pretty and majestic I want to hump it" is another culture's dinner.

Uh, liking Whales is not about them being cute. It took the modern whaling 40 years to almost extinct several species of whales. One of those species was the Blue Whale, the largest known animal to have ever existed. And you honestly think we protect them because they are cute? Jesus.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: makken
meh.
If they're not hunting endangered species of whales, then the japanese have every right to continue harvesting whale meat for food as long as we slaughter cattle for beef.

This is essentially my own thought.

As long as the species being hunted is not endangered I don't see any legitimate argument against whaling per se. I could understand arguments that specific practices used during whaling (the practice of de-finning sharks, for example) are unnecessarily brutal and that, as a result, we should mandate that the slaughter be as humane as possible, much in the same way as we do for livestock, but that's not an argument against whaling qua whaling.

All that said, I do not know any specific facts about the sustainability of Japanese whaling so I cannot make a final judgement. I simply wanted to point out that whaling is not an inherently bad practice in and of itself.

ZV

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: makken
meh.
If they're not hunting endangered species of whales, then the japanese have every right to continue harvesting whale meat for food as long as we slaughter cattle for beef.

This is essentially my own thought.

As long as the species being hunted is not endangered I don't see any legitimate argument against whaling per se. I could understand arguments that specific practices used during whaling (the practice of de-finning sharks, for example) are unnecessarily brutal and that, as a result, we should mandate that the slaughter be as humane as possible, much in the same way as we do for livestock, but that's not an argument against whaling qua whaling.

All that said, I do not know any specific facts about the sustainability of Japanese whaling so I cannot make a final judgement. I simply wanted to point out that whaling is not an inherently bad practice in and of itself.

ZV

Except that it is banned internationally but the Japanese use a loophole saying that they are performing research which everyone knows that they are not.

Secondly, a lot of the whale meat harvested isn't even consumed.

Thirdly, if you see the video that I have linked in this thread, the whales are not killed humanely.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: makken
meh.
If they're not hunting endangered species of whales, then the japanese have every right to continue harvesting whale meat for food as long as we slaughter cattle for beef.

This is essentially my own thought.

As long as the species being hunted is not endangered I don't see any legitimate argument against whaling per se. I could understand arguments that specific practices used during whaling (the practice of de-finning sharks, for example) are unnecessarily brutal and that, as a result, we should mandate that the slaughter be as humane as possible, much in the same way as we do for livestock, but that's not an argument against whaling qua whaling.

wikipedia:

Japanese In its anti-whaling efforts, Sea Shepherd attempts to deter Japanese ships that hunt minke and fin whales in the Southern Ocean In 2005, Japan decided to double their quota kill from the previous year to 935 minke whales and ten endangered fin whales. In 2007 they planned to kill 50 fin whales and 50 endangered humpback whales. The Japanese fleet consists of a factory ship, two spotter vessels, and three harpoon boats. The whalers say that lethal research is needed to accurately measure the whale population, health, and response to global warming and is essential for the sustainable management of the world's cetacean stocks.[4] Australia and New Zealand have started a non-lethal whale research program to show that the Japanese lethal research program is no longer necessary.[103][104] Sea Shepherd and other environmental groups dispute the Japanese claim of research "as a disguise for commercial whaling, which is banned."[19][105] Meat from the hunt is available at Tokyo's famed Tsukiji fish market and Japanese restaurants.[4]

Wikipedia may not be the absolute best source, but I trust it a hell of a lot more than "tcsenter" and the info he gives without any references at all. The Japanese are NOT merely hunting minke whales.

The "but they aren't endangered anymore!" arguments are really tired and lame. Did you stop and think that maybe they aren't endangered because nobody is hunting them, except the Japanese? If every country did the same level of "research" as Japan, I'd bet money that those whales would suddenly drop back to endangered levels and die off shortly after.

apaflo: I agree the Japanese haven't done anything illegal. They have been careful to follow the letter of the treaty, while going against it's spirit. Which is why I said they were being immoral and dishonest, I never said they wear doing anything illegal.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
As long as the species being hunted is not endangered I don't see any legitimate argument against whaling per se.

I guess the question is how accurate the 600k Minke count is and how fast do we believe whalers can cut through that. All we know is that, historically, we've been able to dwindle similar numbers. When you look back at say... 250k blue whales, 200k humpbacks, etc. Those numbers combined were more around 600k and completely demolished.

Perhaps they should do something similar to the Alaskan King Crab season. Here is your 1 week to kill whales.

 

[apaflo]

Originally posted by: Capt CavemanExcept that it is banned internationally but the Japanese use a loophole saying that they are performing research which everyone knows that they are not.

Secondly, a lot of the whale meat harvested isn't even consumed.

Thirdly, if you see the video that I have linked in this thread, the whales are not killed humanely.

The Japanese are not using a "loophole", and they are doing research. They have produced some very good research, and all of it is peer reviewed by the IWC's Science Committee. The research is allowed specifically because the IWC has stated they did not have enough scientific data to produce a Management Plan. The "loophole" is not even an IWC regulation, but a specific article (which I've quoted in a previous post) in the ICRW treaty. It was specifically put there to allow exactly what the Japanese are doing!

Claiming the meat isn't consumed is ridiculous. Others claim they are making a huge profit (also untrue), and still others claim they do it because of the high price it brings due to scarcity (partially true).

The point though still remains that the Japanese have a right to harvest non-endangered whales for food.

As to humane treatment of whales, it really is no different than the way fish or cattle are treated. The die. We eat them.

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: apaflo
Claiming the meat isn't consumed is ridiculous.

On this point, we have your word vs. a Time article. And I'm inclined to believe a well established and respected news organization over a random poster on the internet. How about you provide some credible links to back you up?

and care to provide any links to said Japanese research and what they have discovered thru their research?

 

[apaflo]

Originally posted by: ChiropteranWikipedia may not be the absolute best source, but I trust it a hell of a lot more than "tcsenter" and the info he gives without any references at all.

In fact Wikipedia is an extremely poor source of information. And tcsenter appears to know precisely what he is talking about.

The "but they aren't endangered anymore!" arguments are really tired and lame.

Except it is a fact that Japan is not coming close to over harvesting any of the whale species they hunt.

If every country did the same level of "research" as Japan, I'd bet money that those whales would suddenly drop back to endangered levels and die off shortly after.

Human predation on whales has never, even when Britain and the US were engaged in massive unregulated whaling, caused any whale species to become extinct.

apaflo: I agree the Japanese haven't done anything illegal. They have been careful to follow the letter of the treaty, while going against it's spirit. Which is why I said they were being immoral and dishonest, I never said they wear doing anything illegal.

You are being dishonest! There is no question that Japan is doing exactly what the treaty was written to allow. They are neither legally nor morally, nor in spirit, violating the treaty. (The same cannot be said for the IWC, which has been violating the spirit of the treaty blatantly for decades.)

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: apaflo

Originally posted by: Capt CavemanExcept that it is banned internationally but the Japanese use a loophole saying that they are performing research which everyone knows that they are not.

Secondly, a lot of the whale meat harvested isn't even consumed.

Thirdly, if you see the video that I have linked in this thread, the whales are not killed humanely.

The Japanese are not using a "loophole", and they are doing research. They have produced some very good research, and all of it is peer reviewed by the IWC's Science Committee. The research is allowed specifically because the IWC has stated they did not have enough scientific data to produce a Management Plan. The "loophole" is not even an IWC regulation, but a specific article (which I've quoted in a previous post) in the ICRW treaty. It was specifically put there to allow exactly what the Japanese are doing!

Claiming the meat isn't consumed is ridiculous. Others claim they are making a huge profit (also untrue), and still others claim they do it because of the high price it brings due to scarcity (partially true).

The point though still remains that the Japanese have a right to harvest non-endangered whales for food.

As to humane treatment of whales, it really is no different than the way fish or cattle are treated. The die. We eat them.

To bad the facts do not say that.

The information they got from killing over 6000 whales has producded less than 55 peer-reviewed papers, and most of them would not require killing a whale to get the information and the ones that would require killing would only need less then 10 to get the same data.

To say that killing the whales is first for reserach is BS.


http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1657789.htm
We?ve collected all the research papers the Japanese program has produced over the last 18 years...

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: apaflo
And tcsenter appears to know precisely what he is talking about.

you talking like you're some kind of a pro in this matter and we're just supposed to take your word for it. but in fact, you're a new poster here and we know nothing about you. What makes you credible to claim that "tcsenter appears to know precisely what he is talking about"?

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: apaflo
Human predation on whales has never, even when Britain and the US were engaged in massive unregulated whaling, caused any whale species to become extinct.

At least you aren't arguing how close we came to doing it.......

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: apaflo
And tcsenter appears to know precisely what he is talking about.

you talking like you're some kind of a pro in this matter and we're just supposed to take your word for it. but in fact, you're a new poster here and we know nothing about you. What makes you credible to claim that "tcsenter appears to know precisely what he is talking about"?

They share an IP? 😉

 

[rudder]

I suggest everyone go see Star Trek IV. We need dem whales man for when the probe comes.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: apaflo
Except it is a fact that Japan is not coming close to over harvesting any of the whale species they hunt.

Did you even read my post before you started responding? I agree with that statement, simply because Japan is the only country that is hunting whales. I'm sure they can "harvest" tons of whales because everyone else is playing fair and following the spirit of the treaty.

If every country did the same level of "research" as Japan, I'd bet money that those whales would suddenly drop back to endangered levels and die off shortly after.

Originally posted by: apaflo
Human predation on whales has never, even when Britain and the US were engaged in massive unregulated whaling, caused any whale species to become extinct.

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? It hasn't happened yet so it never will? That is a wonderful argument, if you are arguing with kindergartners.

Originally posted by: apaflo
You are being dishonest! There is no question that Japan is doing exactly what the treaty was written to allow. They are neither legally nor morally, nor in spirit, violating the treaty. (The same cannot be said for the IWC, which has been violating the spirit of the treaty blatantly for decades.)

BS. What are the results of this "research"? You act like you are speaking from knowledge, but you aren't posting any links to back up what you say. You may feel that Wikipedia is a poor source, but it's a vastly better sources than your blanket statements made without any facts to back them up.

 

[apaflo]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: apaflo
Claiming the meat isn't consumed is ridiculous.

On this point, we have your word vs. a Time article. And I'm inclined to believe a well established and respected news organization over a random poster on the internet. How about you provide some credible links to back you up?

The Time article mentions that stockpiles are up (in 2007, but in fact they are now down again). They don't indicate what the long term trend is; but worst of all there was no indication of what consumption numbers might be. They do not put it into perspective for a very simple reason: it would not support their story line! (I.e., you've been scammed.)

The fact is that in January 2008 the stockpiled whale meat was back down to less than 3000 tons. The significance though is really in the fact that over the past several years the incoming stock has virtually matched to outgoing stock. The most recent peak was in 2006 and 2007, when more than 8000 tons were consumed. annual_in_out_bar_graph

When that is compared to the 220,000 tons of whale consumed by the Japanese in 1960 it is clear that restricted availability is the reason for low consumption. Note also that Japan, in 2008, began importing whale meat from Iceland.

and care to provide any links to said Japanese research and what they have discovered thru their research?

JARPA II research plan:
http://www.icrwhale.org/eng/SC57O1.pdf

List of paper presented to the IWC SC:
http://www.icrwhale.org/JARPApaper.htm

List of papers published in peer-reviewed journals:
http://www.icrwhale.org/JARPA91paper.htm

 

[apaflo]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
To bad the facts do not say that.

The information they got from killing over 6000 whales has producded less than 55 peer-reviewed papers, and most of them would not require killing a whale to get the information and the ones that would require killing would only need less then 10 to get the same data.

To say that killing the whales is first for reserach is BS.


http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1657789.htm
We?ve collected all the research papers the Japanese program has produced over the last 18 years...

Your cite is a joke!

In fact, over the 20 year period the research program has operated they had 104 papers published in peer reviewed journals.
That is an astounding average of 5 per year! And there have been nearly 200 reports to the IWC Scientific Committee. (Just try to find any other cetacean research program that produces more.)

List of papers published in peer-reviewed journals:
http://www.icrwhale.org/JARPA91paper.htm

List of paper presented to the IWC SC:
http://www.icrwhale.org/JARPApaper.htm

Having valid facts is a requirement...