Japanese "Scientific Whaling"

[Chi65]

Informations about scientific whaling:

Kidzone - Whale and Dolphin Conservation
3500551523

Japan's Scientific Whaling
The general objectives of the Japanese research programme in Antarctica are stated to be to estimate biological parameters for stock management and to elucidate the role of the minke whales in the ecosystem. The determination of age-specific natural mortality rates of minke whales has been the most important specific objective. Determining stock identity and general biological parameters are other important parts of the research.

The main aim of the North Pacific research is to investigate stock identity using genetic studies, measurement of parasite and pollutant burdens, morphometrics and allozmye studies. The Japanese wished to prevent any unnecessary restrictions on catch quotas in their traditional whaling grounds which might arise through inappropriate stock boundaries.

The Japanese Antarctic research programme has faced considerable methodological difficulties which have resulted in the primary focus being changed from estimating age-specific natural mortality, to the less ambitious one of estimating average natural mortality rates. This is for a variety of reasons, including that it has proved impossible to take a truly random sample of whales because of the age and sex segregation of minke whales in both time and space. Large groups of whales have proved easier to sample than small groups or individuals and difficulties with ageing techniques have added to the problems. The confidence which can be placed in any results therefore remains in question. Many of the problems which have been encountered were raised by other scientists on the Scientific Committee during discussions of the research proposals but largely disregarded by the Japanese.

Stock identity studies using genetic techniques have provided valuable information on the populations of whales in both the Antarctic and the North Pacific. However, this information could have been obtained using non-lethal biopsy techniques.

The efforts the Japanese have made to develop their lethal research methodologies are in contrast to the limited effort placed in developing non-lethal alternatives such as biopsy sampling. The higher costs of non-lethal research, where costs cannot be recouped by the sale of products have influenced this.

None of the Japanese research results to date have been used either to improve upon current management plans or to develop new plans. Only the stock identity work, using information from genetic studies, is being used in implementation simulation trials with the Revised Management Plan (RMP), the IWC's current approach to the management of whaling.

Therefore, none of the scientific whaling programmes fulfilled the IWC's criteria. Despite substantive criticisms, many of which have been shown to be valid in retrospect, the research programmes have gone ahead with little modification. The IWC and the Scientific Committee have not taken control of the scientific whaling programmes to ensure their quality. In part this is because the Scientific Committee have been unable to institute mechanisms of review which would be generally considered consistent with good science - those involved in the research are part of the review and thus even basic standards of impartiality are not met.

Illegal trade in whale meat has taken place in the space created by sales of meat from the scientific catch. What the impacts of illegal sale of whale meat on other stocks of whales maybe, or how the research funding is influencing the Japanese research away from non-lethal methods has not been considered during the Scientific Committee's review process.

Clear enough for a start?

 

[Sarapva]

I think this part says it all:

The efforts the Japanese have made to develop their lethal research methodologies are in contrast to the limited effort placed in developing non-lethal alternatives such as biopsy sampling. The higher costs of non-lethal research, where costs cannot be recouped by the sale of products have influenced this.

It would cost more for the Japanese to conduct non-lethal research because they wouldn't have the whale meat to sell afterwards!

 

[Kyoto Returnee]

Yes, we are definitely on to something here.

I think it's about time the whalers and JP government came clean and actually told the truth as to what they are doing instead of hiding behind a curtain.

 

[Chi65]

As if that is a reason or excuse for killing after all. . .:-(
They simply should not do it then, because it basically can be done another way. . .if not by them, then others, right?
What is the whaling company, if he gives his acceptance to this?
Nothing better!
The Japanese might even get additional helpers for another way from the anti-whaling front, if you think it through, but as long as they have excessive(!) commercial goals with whale-meat, they will get nothing but hate in the end, when this becomes clear in the broad public. And as said, Davos is already at it.
It also says at another part once more, that they simply did not consider or work it out enough, so what.
Eating habits? Excuse me, if I laugh even louder now. . .(not at you, S., you probably understand)
A real bad joke to fool people.

It seems to be a fine and very informed whale page, by the way!
Worth to be watched.
Wiltshire, UK based, actually.

Sorry, Kyoto retournee, you were faster, and I agree completely with you.

Berlin Sherlock ;-)

 

[Chi65]

And after all, they have too much (contaminated) whale meet in their freezers already, think about this part!
And they knew it before, thus its a complete mismanagement, and thats one of the reasons, why they now have to manipulate the people to come back to eat their crap, argh...

This bubble will burst, sooner or later.

 

[Chi65]

More about the first quotes:

What WDCS is doing

WDCS has been actively campaigning against Japanese whaling and trade in whale meat for years, including the following:

Funding undercover investigations, conducting unique opposition research into the whaling industry, and
monitoring Japanese press and government websites on a daily basis.

Working closely with Japanese NGOs to inform the world about Japan's activities, refute its spurious arguments
and debunk its hollow science.

Sending an expert team to all meetings of the International Whaling Commission and CITES where our most
intense and visible effort goes into deploying our scientific, legal and other technical skills to block Japan and influence votes.

Building relationships with governments so that they believe the intelligence we provide is correct and trust our advice.

Providing technical support to like-minded governments seeking specialist legal or scientific input.

Providing financial support to exceptional NGOs in developing countries; for example providing travel costs to enable them to attend meetings with their government officials, and even come to IWC meetings so that they can lobby at first hand and – most importantly - report to the press and public back home to keep leveraging pressure.

Leading and participating in international coalitions of conservation and animal welfare groups so that our collective resources and effort are maximised

Leading public protests against Japanese whaling

Our research and advocacy contribute to discussions and initiatives on benign research techniques (for example to prove that Japan's argument that whales need to be killed to study them - is wrong).

 

[Chi65]

More informations, please, the full text on

http://www.panda.org/news_facts/newsroom/index.cfm?uNewsID=13793&uLangID=1

ALTERNATIVES TO LETHAL RESEARCH

Although the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling does contain a provision that allows governments to issue their own lethal research permits, it was written more than 50 years ago, at a time when no practicable alternatives existed. At that time, killing whales was unfortunately the only way to learn some of the most basic biological information, which was then used in setting catch quotas. In the last 50 years, non-lethal techniques have been developed that provide the data required for management much more efficiently and accurately than can lethal sampling.

For example, genetic analysis of small skin samples is now widely used to understand population structure in many mammals, including whales. Recent technical advances in this field have revolutionized genetics and meant that scientists can undertake detailed analyses that were previously impossible, or very cumbersome and expensive. Genetic analyses allow the examination of different whales in different geographic areas, assisting in determining where the boundaries of different whale stocks might be - a critical question in quota management, since in the past whaling nations frequently set high quotas for large areas based on the mistaken belief that the total number of whales in an area were all part of the same population. Genetic samples are generally taken from a live whale using a biopsy dart, and do not require killing or injuring the animal. Biopsy darting is also far more efficient, allowing scientists to acquire large amounts of data from a broader section of the whale population.

Japan also claims it must kill whales to determine what they eat, which they accomplish by studying stomach contents of the dead whales. However, this generally provides nothing more than a snapshot view of the most recently consumed prey, and may not be indicative of the real diet, particularly with whales such as minkes, which consume a broad range of prey items. In contrast, stable isotope analysis from skin samples, again obtained using a biopsy dart on a live whale, provides a long-term view of the whale's diet over a longer time period. Whatever food is consumed has a unique isotopic "signature" reflected in the tissues of the animal consuming the food. This technique has been applied all over the world in studies of other whales.

Japan also claims that lethal research is needed to determine the sex and reproductive condition of whales. Yet sex is easily determined with a biopsy sample, and a recently developed technique also enables scientists to determine pregnancy from such material.

Given these modern techniques in common use in whale science elsewhere in the world, it is very clear that Japan's scientific methods are an anachronism, and nothing more than an excuse to kill whales for the meat market.

 

[kame]

All the more reason for Japanese to pursue commercial whaling.

I wonder what are the anti-whaling advocates are thinking by criticizing Japanese whaling as scientific research. Politically, there is absolutely no way that the Japanese government will give up whaling in the foreseeable future. So if the international community chooses to criticize the research purpose, Japan has no choice but to go commercial even if it means ditching IWC.

Japanese officials have clearly stated that they "postponed" hunting 50 humpback whales for the time being because they wanted to give IWC chairman the last chance to normalize the dysfunctional organization. I don't know how serious they are, but it's obvious that Japan is getting close to the edge.

Would you rather keep Japanese whaling under "research" which will effectively lock the quota at the current (more than sustainable) level, or would you rather push Japan and the rest of the whaling nations out of IWC and risk less-regulated commercial whaling? Politically, there's no likely alternatives.

In the diplomatic world, you can't always get 100% of what you want.

 

[centrajapan]

Japans research programme is very scientifical and there is nothing illeagal about it. Why dont you go to IWC web page and check it for yourself instead of getting biased info through close minded anti whaling fanatics about IWC and Japans scientific research.

Whaling is by far the most strictly regualted whild hunt there is on this planet. I would welcome other type of wild hunt to be as monitored and scientific as whaling.

It is hard to dicsuss whaling with people who know nothing about it and who are close minded towards other cultures.

 

[centrajapan]

Attitudes on whaling

Respondents in Australia, England, Germany and the U.S. held opinions markedly different from those expressed by Japanese and Norwegians when each was questioned about whaling.

For example, when asked whether they "opposed the hunting of whales under any circumstances" a sizeable majority of respondents in Australia and Germany agreed (by a two to one margin). However, even larger majorities (two and a half to three to one) in Japan and Norway disagreed with the statement that whales should not be hunted under any circumstances. Opposition to whaling under any circumstances was more moderate in the U.S. (a four to three majority opposing whaling) and even more evenly divided in England with 43% opposed to whaling, 37% not opposed, and a further 19% expressing no strong opinion one way or the other.

In Germany and Australia about half the respondents (60% in the U.S.) believe there are less than 10,000 minke whales in the world, and only about 5% thought that the number was greater than 100,000. Respondents in Japan and Norway were three to four times as likely to select a correct answer for minke whale population levels compared to those in Australia, England, Germany, or the U.S.

Conclusions

The public in each country appears to have only a limited amount of accurate knowledge concerning whales and issues related to whaling. However, somewhat greater knowledge was possessed by the public in the two countries (Japan and Norway) where support for whaling is strongest.


highnorth.no

 

[Chi65]

Japans research programme is very scientifical and there is nothing illeagal about it. Why dont you go to IWC web page and check it for yourself instead of getting biased info through close minded anti whaling fanatics about IWC and Japans scientific research.
Whaling is by far the most strictly regualted whild hunt there is on this planet. I would welcome other type of wild hunt to be as monitored and scientific as whaling.
It is hard to dicsuss whaling with people who know nothing about it and who are close minded towards other cultures.

I also did go to the IWC webpage before, often enough, don't worry.
Plus to many other ones.
Certain facts remain the same, and I don't think, other pages with informations from other scientists are closed minded. In fact, it appears much more, that the closedmindedness is on the whaler side.
To see, what is ignored there, does not take much. Almost everything, that is not grown on their own field, although their own field ignores the poison on this one. Which really does not make them very reliable at all.

Commercial whaling or scientific whaling leads to the very same, eating and distributing poisoned and thus unnecessary meet.

The rest is blabla and nothing but distractions.

 

[centrajapan]

In fact, it appears much more, that the closedmindedness is on the whaler side.

Why? You sound like a sausage eating imperialist for saying this. Am I telling you to stop eating sausages? I dont think so.

 

[Chi65]

Sausages are not half as contaminated as whale meat, particularly not those from eco-shops. So what is the blaming for? And it has nothing to do with imperialists, thats hilarious, as so much from you.
If you wish to go on poisioning with whale meat, you can do so. That does not change the fact, that its poisoned, nor has that to do with me, in case you can think clear sometimes.
Your posts like this are clear trollings, nothing else.

 

[outspoken_plimpy]

Japan actually makes a loss from whaling. It costs 3000 million yen to go whale each year, and from selling the whale meat and by-products of scientific research they get 2700 million yen, the Japanese Government has to fund the rest. Also, at the rate that Japan is taking Minke whales (which makes over 95% of their catch) if only 1 in 800 Minke whales breed the population will be sustained.

 

[TripLover]

This morning I read a news and just laughed.
I just come back here to show the aussie joke.

www news.com.au/story/0,23599,23468776-421,00.html
Japan cries foul over Australia's dugong hunt

"The Australian Government rejects all lethal uses of whales and yet supports sustainable utilisation in its own national hunting of the dugong."

Federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett said there was no analogy between Japanese whaling and the killing of dugongs. He said the federal Government was actively engaged in several programs to protect dugongs.

Torres Shire Deputy Mayor Allan Ketchell said dugongs were an important traditional food for Islanders, but because there were no limits and the sea mammals were easy to catch with motorised boats, too many were being killed.

"Sometimes people go out and spear five or six when one or two a month should be enough," he said.

Australian local rule
#Killing wild kangaroo (sustainable) OK
#Killing wild dugong (IUCN lists as species vulnerable to extinction),(sustainable) OK
#Killing wild Mink whale ( IUCN list the northern species as Lower Risk/Near Threatened and the southern as Lower Risk/Conservation dependent ),(sustainable) Never!!

"Very Fair and Scientific Attitude"

 

[MadamePapillon]

"Sometimes people go out and spear five or six when one or two a month should be enough," he said.

Five or six sea animals a month to feed Islanders is a far cry from the 900+ whales Japan wants to harvest for the whole Japanese population.
I don't know what you are trying to prove. By anyones standards killing five or six animals of any kind a month to feed the locals isn't considered an offense.
Oh, and the link didn't even work

EDIT:
From the same website...
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23474310-421,00.html?from=public_rss

THE world population of the Antarctic minke whale, the main species hunted by the Japanese, is half what it was thought to be, after a more accurate analysis of survey numbers.

*rolls eyes*

 

[david@tokyo]

Five or six sea animals a month to feed Islanders is a far cry from the 900+ whales Japan wants to harvest for the whole Japanese population.

What true conservationists consider is not "five or six" versus "900+", but the ability of the exploited population to sustain such a level of anthropogenic removals.

The article suggests that even the most pessimistic estimate puts the Antarctic minke whale population at over 200,000.
900+ is less than 0.5% of even this most pessimistic of population estimates.

By anyones standards killing five or six animals of any kind a month to feed the locals isn't considered an offense.

They are believed to be taking more than that in total, and further, how many dugongs are there in the population that the Australians are hunting? Do you think that there is no chance at all that this population could be depleted locally?

 

[kame]

I wonder if we are reading the same article. The article states:

James Cook University researcher Ivan Lawler said a university study had concluded that in the Torres Strait, about 100 dugongs a year - 10 per cent of the current harvest - could be taken sustainably.

They are overhunting creature by ten times the number considered to be sustainable by the Australian researcher.

The number of minke whales killed annually by the Japanese, ostensibly for scientific research, is similar to the number of dugongs killed each year for food in the Torres Strait - about 1000.

Many more dugongs are killed for food - or when drowned in fishing nets or hit by motor boats - elsewhere in northern Australia, and in Papua New Guinea and Indonesia.

So they DO kill >1000 dugongs a year. So I wonder if you would like to retract your statement.

Five or six sea animals a month to feed Islanders is a far cry from the 900+ whales Japan wants to harvest for the whole Japanese population.
I don't know what you are trying to prove. By anyones standards killing five or six animals of any kind a month to feed the locals isn't considered an offense.

Again from the article,

Environment Minister Peter Garrett said the dugong was not listed as a threatened species in Australia, and harvesting the sea mammals for traditional food was not comparable to Japan's "industrial" whaling.

TripLover, you are right, this has got to be a joke! I double checked the date to make sure that it wasn't released on Apr.1.

The fact that dugong was not listed as a threatened species in Australia is a disgrace as self-proclaimed conservationists. Garrett is right that Japan's sustainable whaling is not comparable to the irresponsible exploitation of the rare and endangered dugongs.

 

[MadamePapillon]

Good lord, look what the cat dragged in. I was wondering how long it would take you two to rise from the dead.

Anyways, you are acting as if hunting Dugongs is some sort of widespread industrialized practice. The Dugongs are being hunted by island aborigines, this is not some massive government funded operation as is the case with Japan, and the practice was banned by the Australian Government since the 1970s, selling Dugong meat (in Australia) is illegal.
You call Australia a disgrace for this but it's like blaming Canada and America for the actions of Eskimos or S. Americans for the forest tribes actions, it's simply not comparable.
As we all know, the natives tend to go about their business while the Government and general public rarely look their way unless a scandal pops up. I doubt the general public (and even many government officials) even knew this was taking place. And the only people actually defending killing the Dugongs is the aborigines themselves.

But I like how suddenly you two became champions of the Dugong while the whale can still go to hell. Nice.

And I noticed how the two of you didn't bother to comment on:

THE world population of the Antarctic minke whale, the main species hunted by the Japanese, is half what it was thought to be, after a more accurate analysis of survey numbers.

 

[outspoken_plimpy]

Even if it is only the Aborigines hunting the dugongs, they still catch more dugongs then Japan takes whales. Also, Japan is legally required to sell the by-products of scientific whaling because thats part of the clause that allows scientific whaling. And before anyone can cast doubt on "scientific whaling" the clause is specifically for what Japan is currently doing and the IWC has no problem with what they do, its only America and Australia.

 

[kame]

Anyways, you are acting as if hunting Dugongs is some sort of widespread industrialized practice. The Dugongs are being hunted by island aborigines, this is not some massive government funded operation as is the case with Japan, and the practice was banned by the Australian Government since the 1970s, selling Dugong meat (in Australia) is illegal.

You, as well as few other people on this forum, seem to have some irrational grudge against commercial utilization of natural resources. What is important is whether or not the hunting is sustainable, not whether the meat is consumed locally or sold in supermarkets. It's not right to overhunt endangered species just because the hunters are aborigines. Conversely, there's nothing wrong with commercial harvest of a species in a sustainable manner.

What about kangaroos? They are overtly hunted commercially in a much larger scale than whales in Australia. I think it's okay as long as it's sustainable, but would you oppose it because it's commercial?

You call Australia a disgrace for this but it's like blaming Canada and America for the actions of Eskimos or S. Americans for the forest tribes actions, it's simply not comparable.

I did and I do denounce Canada for the hypocrisy of critisizing sustainable commercial whaling while condoning their own people hunting some of the endangered whale species. I don't blame the Eskimos themselves as long as the whaling is performed sustainably.

 

[david@tokyo]

Good lord, look what the cat dragged in. I was wondering how long it would take you two to rise from the dead.

You need not make comments such as that.

Anyways, you are acting as if hunting Dugongs is some sort of widespread industrialized practice.

Nonsense.

What is important is sustainability. Not absolute numbers (or technology employed). There is a difference.

But I like how suddenly you two became champions of the Dugong while the whale can still go to hell. Nice.

As I pointed out in my previous comment, the Antarctic minke whale is clearly not under threat from human hunting at the present time.

You should be careful about jumping to conclusions about what the (as of yet unconfirmed) estimates mean in terms of trends in abundance. The IWC scientific committee has given a range of possible reasons for the decline in abundance *estimates*, of which only one possibility is that such a decline is real. And at any rate, there are hundreds of thousands of them.

 

[outspoken_plimpy]

Five or six sea animals a month to feed Islanders is a far cry from the 900+ whales Japan wants to harvest for the whole Japanese population.
I don't know what you are trying to prove. By anyones standards killing five or six animals of any kind a month to feed the locals isn't considered an offense.
Oh, and the link didn't even work
*rolls eyes*

It was never said that it was 5/6 a month, but 5/6 a trip. A single group can make 20+ trips per month which brings it closer to a possible 100 per month per group

 

[MadamePapillon]

I don't know why you three are acting as if I (or the majority of the Australian public) is for this. Like I said, the only people actually defending this is the aborigines, the Australian Government long ago made efforts to stop any commercial hunting and selling of Dugong meat as I pointed out before.
You are taking the actions of island tribes who don't want to let go of ancient practices and putting it as the actions of Australia as a whole, which is ridiculous.

The IWC scientific committee has given a range of possible reasons for the decline in abundance *estimates*, of which only one possibility is that such a decline is real. And at any rate, there are hundreds of thousands of them.

So the estimates suddenly turn out to be wrong, they overshot the mark by about half which is no small error. So much for that unshakable faith in the numbers. But, there are only a few hundred thousand of these animals in the world and you are still for the commercial hunting of them despite all evidence that 'sustainable' hunting is rarely ever that and even when Minke whales are regarded as high risk animals for extinction.
Add to that the fact that it has been proven there is very little market for whale meat in Japan, the stores are piling up and the government is actually putting money into the operation to make up for the loss ..... it seems like absolute madness that anyone is rallying for it.

To be honest, I really can't see what you are fighting for.
Japans right to hunt another marine species to the brink of extinction as they have in the past? while at the same time losing money over this 'scientific whaling' and accumulating tons of meat that nobody seems to want and all this just to prove that they 'don't have to listen to what the west says'?
I mean...wow.

 

[outspoken_plimpy]

But, there are only a few hundred thousand of these animals in the world and you are still for the commercial hunting of them despite all evidence that 'sustainable' hunting is rarely ever that and even when Minke whales are regarded as high risk animals for extinction.

There are 900 000 of them, which is a large number by anyones standards. Also, I would like to know who exactly thinks they are high risk?

Add to that the fact that it has been proven there is very little market for whale meat in Japan, the stores are piling up and the government is actually putting money into the operation to make up for the loss ..... it seems like absolute madness that anyone is rallying for it.
To be honest, I really can't see what you are fighting for.
Japans right to hunt another marine species to the brink of extinction as they have in the past? while at the same time losing money over this 'scientific whaling' and accumulating tons of meat that nobody seems to want and all this just to prove that they 'don't have to listen to what the west says'?
I mean...wow.

So, basically, what your saying is that using scientific whaling as a guise for commercial whaling and taking a species of whale near to extinction and losing money by this is ridiculous and simply not logical. I have to agree, you make a valid point, this does not sound like something a rational nation would do. However, I can propose an alternative hypothesis. Maybe, they are actually doing scientific whaling. I know crazy, isn't it? Just bear with me. Then, say there was this clause, in the whaling memoriam that said they can do scientific whaling, and said the byproducts shouldn't go to waste. So Japan does this scientific whaling, and as they still make a loss, it obviously can't be commercial. It accounts for everything. Coincidence? Maybe, but unlikely.