Editorial - by Graham J. Clarke

7 August, 2018

International Whaling Commission Meeting

Japan's chief whaling negotiator and International Whaling Commission Chairman, Joji Morishita told Australian media that the International Whaling Commission (IWC) cannot continue on the same path of dispute and deadlock. ABC News (August 3, 2018) And the only way to break this deadlock is to change the paradigm.

Let's take a look at what he is saying:

DISPUTE - What dispute? The Commission votes at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) and the majority vote wins. How is that a dispute? It's normal business meeting protocol.

DEADLOCK - What deadlock? Every year Japan requests a vote on Limited Commercial Whaling. A poll is taken and the motion is lost. How is that a deadlock? Again, normal.

IWC Chaiman, Joji_Morishita

Given that the Articles of Association of the IWC (Constitution) were drawn up in 1948 by a group of WHALERS one might expect Japan to understand and respect other whalers. But no, Japan wants to play the spoiled brat, stamp it's feet and hold it's breath until it gets it's way. Which, by-the-way, it's already doing by slaughtering 333 Minke whales in the Antarctic every year and 16 in their coastal waters. Every year they slaughter 150 Minke whales, 25 Bryde's whales and up to 134 Sei whales in the North Pacific. Thinks... if Japan regards it's current whaling as scientific what is it's definition of limited whaling?

'Limited means Sustainable', I hear you say. But do you realise that zero population growth can be classed as sustainable'. More on that later.

Morishita says the decision-making paradigm must be changed from a 75% majority to a 50/50 simple majority. Yet, according to the Japan's fisheries agency only about 40 of the 88 members of the IWC support whaling.

He says, 'If you cannot change the paradigm from that of mutual denial... this organisation (IWC) will be having a very difficult time or might lose its reason to exist.' The adoption of a simple majority is not going to change deligates votes? If there is 'mutual denial' which there is not (40/48 according to Japan) then, at present, Japan's motion would not pass. Even using a vote by simple majority nothing changes or does it? If the vote ever reached 44/44 will the Chairman of the IWC get the deciding vote? Did the whalers in 1948, by adopting the 75% majority vote proceedure, deliberately inhibit the possibility of one man deciding the course of the IWC. I say they did.

Let's now look at Morishita's statement, 'The IWC might lose its reason to exist.'

On 23 July, 1982 understanding that the great whales were in serious peril of extinction the IWC voted on implementing a pause in whaling and 78% of deligates agreed to cease Commercial Whaling. Thus the Moratorium on Commercial Whaling was adopted and set to come into force in 1986.

While the Moratorium became an icon of green activism it was only a pause in whaling with its end to be discussed regularly by Member States of the IWC. Member States have varied views on when this should happen:

• Now
• The main agitator for the end of the Moratoriun is Japan. Morishita says, 'Humans are on the top of the food chain - we eat living creatures with gratitude and by properly managing the resources. I believe it's a path we should take regarding animals and plants including whales.'
  
  It is no secret that Japan use the oceans as it's almost exclusive food source and it's free. Let's face it, the oceans are unmanageable, as it's use is mostly out-of-sight.


• After whale populations recover
• To me this means when whale populations reach their pre-modern whaling numbers. After all should we not allow the whales to return to their equilibrium with nature?
  
  So, how do we know when this occurs? We use Whale Biomass ie. the total weight of whales in the ocean (measured in tons). Examine the graph to the right and you will see one glaring fact - the total amount of whales in the ocean today has barely changed since the Moratoriun on Commercial Whaling came into force - 32 years ago.


• While whale populations are recovering
• Currently, there are apparently 40 nations that want to return to sustainable whaling. One can only imagine what would happen if 40 nations began whaling now - even limited.

Australia stands with other nations to demand NO whaling NOW. You can see why.

Sources:

Japan Pushes for IWC Changes

The Impact of Whaling on the Ocean Carbon Cycle

Japan kills 177 whales during annual hunt in Pacific Ocean

IWC - Conservation & Management - Commercial Whaling