Founder of Sea Shepherd Arrested in Germany

[StankApe]

And that is not actually a true statement.

have you seen some of the stuff the Japanese eat? They might think it's the bestest thing EVER!!!

 

[theprestige]

have you seen some of the stuff the Japanese eat? They might think it's the bestest thing EVER!!!

There appears to be some debate as to whether the Japanese market for whale meat actually exists.

But regardless, the tastiness of whale meat isn't the thing Nisshin Maru is researching under the terms of the treaty.

 

[Marcus]

What, exactly, do you think the Nisshin Maru is researching?

In fact, it's not a funny thing at all. Research whaling is explicitly permitted by the whaling treaty that Japan has signed. Japan's current whaling activity is in full compliance with that treaty.

Compare that to Norway, which simply left the treaty and resumed full-scale commercial whaling.

So, again, what research do you think Japan is doing? What's Japan's annual research catch? What is Norway's annual commercial catch? Which behavior is actually "worse"--small-scale research whaling permitted by the treaty, or full-scale commercial whaling prohibited by the treaty?

The Nisshin Maru isn't researching anything. They are pretending to do a small amount of research so they can pretend to follow international law, when in reality their only interest is in commercial whaling.

This subterfuge is what I object to, I'm not against whaling that observes agreed upon international limits.

If Norway has left the treaty and resumed full scale whaling, that would be bad in my opinion but not as bad as Japan because they are not being duplicitous about the whole thing.

 

[Seismosaurus]

Wow.

You think the SSCS has no affect at all?

I didn't say that. I've no idea what effect they have, if any. I hope it's not a lot - indeed I'd hope they had none at all. But it's an imperfect universe.

 

[Marcus]

My apologies. I didn't mean to imply that Norway was violating a treaty they hadn't even signed.

Marcus, which would you prefer? That Norway signed the treaty and abided by its commercial whaling prohibitions? Or that Japan abandoned the treaty and scaled up from treaty-permitted research whaling to treaty-prohibited commercial whaling?

3) Both countries abide by the treaty.

 

[theprestige]

The Nisshin Maru isn't researching anything. They are pretending to do a small amount of research so they can pretend to follow international law, when in reality their only interest is in commercial whaling.

First, I agree that their only interest is in commercial whaling.

Second, it's not "international law" that matters, it's the treaty that Japan has actually signed, and is actually complying with.

Third, okay then: what treaty-approved research is Japan pretending to do? (Hint: Not only is the research treaty-approved, it's also consistent with their interest in commercial whaling.)

 

[NoahFence]

I didn't say that. I've no idea what effect they have, if any. I hope it's not a lot - indeed I'd hope they had none at all. But it's an imperfect universe.

Well, seeing as though the Japanese whalers have openly admitted they close their seasons early due to interference from SSCS, I'd say they have a pretty big effect. But I'm sure somehow the Japanese whalers won't be the authority on Japanese whaling next...

 

[portlandatheist]

For those that REALLY want to make a difference and save the whales, these guys would be a much easier target and many more whales could be saved. I guess it wouldn't make as good television though.

Whaling in Barrow, Alaska:

 

[Seismosaurus]

Well, seeing as though the Japanese whalers have openly admitted they close their seasons early due to interference from SSCS, I'd say they have a pretty big effect.

If true then some effect, obviously. Whether that translates into an affect on the number of whales caught is another issue. Do they merely catch the same number of whales that they intended to, only do it faster and finish early? I don't know.

I'm perfectly willing to believe that they have an effect, even a major one - all it means is that I even more wish to see them fail, preferably spectacularly. Bad enough for people to try and do bad things, even worse when they succeed.

But I'm sure somehow the Japanese whalers won't be the authority on Japanese whaling next...

I don't see why you'd think so, but whatever.

 

[Marcus]

There appears to be some debate as to whether the Japanese market for whale meat actually exists.

But regardless, the tastiness of whale meat isn't the thing Nisshin Maru is researching under the terms of the treaty.

If the Japanase market didn't exist the Nissan Maru wouldn't exist. It is an actual factory, IIRC there are over a hundred employees processing the whales into frozen, finished product. The meat is already packaged, labeled, and priced(remember we are talking about thousands of tons at a whack) and is trucked directly to retail outlets from the ship when it docks. It's just silly to pretend this has anything to with research.

 

[NoahFence]

Well, they're right smack in the middle of leaving early again right now. Why? Because they can't refuel. Why? Because of SSCS.

 

[tsig]

Then Sea Shepherd are also breaking the law.
See http://www.allatsea.co.za/oranjemund.htm

Their actions seem counter productive. Whaling is subsidized by the government and without the SS antics the government might want to end the expense.

Could Sea Shepherd’s “sabotage” tactics, which include hurling rancid butter on to the decks of harpoon vessels, actually be harming the anti-whaling cause? Watanabe believes the group, described as “eco-terrorists” by the whaling lobby, may have hindered the conservationist cause. “Violent incidents at sea actually help Japan promote whaling at home,” he said.



The fleet of between four and six vessels that leaves for the Antarctic every winter costs the taxpayer about $10 million dollars a year, according to IFAW. Last year the subsidy included 2.28 billion yen ($20 million) in funds intended to aid the reconstruction of the region devastated by the March 2011 tsunami. The government’s excuse: that some of the affected communities had a tradition of coastal whale hunting.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/.../japan/130214/whaling-whalemeat-japanese-food

 

[NoahFence]

Their actions seem counter productive. Whaling is subsidized by the government and without the SS antics the government might want to end the expense.

Could Sea Shepherd’s “sabotage” tactics, which include hurling rancid butter on to the decks of harpoon vessels, actually be harming the anti-whaling cause? Watanabe believes the group, described as “eco-terrorists” by the whaling lobby, may have hindered the conservationist cause. “Violent incidents at sea actually help Japan promote whaling at home,” he said.



The fleet of between four and six vessels that leaves for the Antarctic every winter costs the taxpayer about $10 million dollars a year, according to IFAW. Last year the subsidy included 2.28 billion yen ($20 million) in funds intended to aid the reconstruction of the region devastated by the March 2011 tsunami. The government’s excuse: that some of the affected communities had a tradition of coastal whale hunting.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/.../japan/130214/whaling-whalemeat-japanese-food

One of the first things I ever heard Captain Paul Watson say was he wanted to bankrupt the whalers. That's how he really wants to stop it. I'm sure if he really wanted to harm the whalers he could.

 

[theprestige]

If the Japanase market didn't exist the Nissan Maru wouldn't exist. It is an actual factory, IIRC there are over a hundred employees processing the whales into frozen, finished product. The meat is already packaged, labeled, and priced(remember we are talking about thousands of tons at a whack) and is trucked directly to retail outlets from the ship when it docks.

Those are good points, and it sure seems reasonable to assume that the Japanese market exists. However, there really is some debate about this:

“Whaling is an unprofitable business that can survive only with substantial subsidies and one that caters to an increasingly shrinking and aging market,” according to the report, released earlier this month by the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW).

Source: http://www.minnpost.com/global-post/2013/02/japanese-turn-against-whaling
Source: http://www.ifaw.org/sites/default/files/economics-of-japanese-whaling-japan-ifaw.pdf

It's just silly to pretend this has anything to with research.

And yet the treaty explicitly permits research. Is the treaty silly? What research is Japan pretending to do? Why is it permitted by the treaty?

 

[Cleon]

If the Japanase market didn't exist the Nissan Maru wouldn't exist.

Not necessarily; as I pointed out upthread, whaling is heavily subsidized by the Japanese government.

 

[theprestige]

I've been pre-ninja'd!

 

[Magenta]

Their actions seem counter productive. Whaling is subsidized by the government and without the SS antics the government might want to end the expense.

There's a very strong nationalist element to the Japanese government's support for whaling. They resist criticism from anyone - not just Sea Shepherd. From the article you linked:

The industry is also protected by a “committed core group” of fisheries agency bureaucrats and politicians who use international criticism to boost their case for lethal research, according to IFAW's Ramage.

“They’ve effectively married the funding issue to an argument that says anyone who criticizes whaling is anti-Japanese or that whale meat is fundamental to Japanese food culture,” he said. “But this report shows that the Japanese people don’t buy that argument any more than they’re buying whale meat.”

And from an article in The Japan Times:

Why is Japan so persistent about whaling?

One big reason is that it evokes a sense of nationalism. Japan does not want to stop whaling simply because it is told to do so by Western countries, including those that encouraged Japanese to eat whale meat after the war, when other food sources were scarce, critics say.

Link

And yet the treaty explicitly permits research. Is the treaty silly? What research is Japan pretending to do? Why is it permitted by the treaty?

You would need to wade through a lot of material to answer those questions. Article VIII (scientific permit whaling) is on the IWC website. (Andrew Darby in Harpoon: Into the Heart of Whaling described Article VIII as being "floated into the treaty from another, mythical, time when scholarly science and devious politics were strangers".)

As to the efficacy of Japan's so-called research, Catalyst did a program in 2006 where they had three scientists look at the research papers that Japan has produced. After separating out papers that weren't peer reviewed or relevant for managing commercial whaling, or contained research that could be done by non-lethal methods they were left with 4 papers. The only information that can't be obtained by non-lethal methods is age, but there is arguably no need for that:

Nick Gales: But the important point is that within the IWC, you don’t need that age data. To establish a catch limit for whaling you need information about population structure, abundance and prior whaling history. You don’t need age data.

[...]

Prof Archer: Alright, that’s it. And from that whole pile of papers we’ve got a total of one, two, three, four papers that can be said to be peer reviewed, that have some relevance to developing or managing a whaling industry and also would require lethal sampling of whales to get that information. Just four papers.

Nick Gales: So with the eighteen year program and sixty eight hundred whales divided by four papers - that means 1700 whales killed for each one of those four papers.

Mike Archer: Extremely depressing.

Nick Gales: It wouldn’t pass an ethics committee.

Archer: No it would not.

Link

 

[ddt]

First, I agree that their only interest is in commercial whaling.

Second, it's not "international law" that matters, it's the treaty that Japan has actually signed, and is actually complying with.

Third, okay then: what treaty-approved research is Japan pretending to do? (Hint: Not only is the research treaty-approved, it's also consistent with their interest in commercial whaling.)

I think the point is arguable whether Japan complies with the treaty. See the wiki page of the Institute of Cetacean Research for an overview. Most everybody outside Japan - including those on the Scientific Committee of the IWC - think the Japanese "research" is a sham. Fact of the matter is that for most research on whales, it is not necessary to kill them. About the only research that would require that was mentioned by Ryokan a couple of posts up, to devise more humane harpoons.

 

[Magenta]

More on Japanese whaling research:

"Japan’s whaling plan under scrutiny: Useful science or unregulated commercial whaling?" Nicholas J. Gales, Toshio Kasuya, Phillip J. Clapham and Robert L. Brownell Jr
Nature, 16 June 2005

Scientific whaling occurs under Article VIII of the convention, whereby each member nation can grant its nationals a permit to take whales for scientific purposes. Unlike the international regulations on commercial and aboriginal/subsistence whaling, the objectives of the research and the number of whales to be killed for scientific purposes are set unilaterally by the member nation. Although the Scientific Committee (SC) of the IWC provides expert assessment of national research plans, the nations carrying out scientific whaling are not obliged to modify their research.

[...]

Japan’s expanded programme will result in annual catches that are more than half the total cumulative catches for scientific research by all nations in the past half-century. Such takes differ little in scale from commercial whaling, and must be justified by an adequate scientific rationale.

[...]

A 1997 IWC review of Japan’s scientific whaling reported that the research conducted failed to meet its stated objectives and that the data derived were “not required for management”. Even today, the programme’s publication record is very poor for an 18-year research endeavour of this size. Very few peer-reviewed papers have come from the Japanese programme, none has been published in the IWC’s management-focused
Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, and only one (on stock structure) is relevant to the scientific parameters used for species management.

A further criticism by SC members is that Japan’s scientific whaling occurs within the IWC’s Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary where commercial whaling was specifically prohibited (so that scientists could study populations not subject to whaling). However, repeated calls by the IWC to Japan to halt its scientific whaling activities have had no effect.

Full text [pdf]

 

[PhantomWolf]

Not at all true. The quota is a maximum, not a target. There is nothing to suggest that the Clowns of the Sea have stopped them reaching it because there is nothing to suggest that they intend to reach it.

Just take a look at the numbers. As of 2005 Japan gives itself a quote of just under a thousand Minke and 10 Fin Whales from the SO.

catch by year

2005/6 - M: 866 F: 10
2006/7 - M: 508 F: 3
2007/8 - M: 551 F: 0
2008/9 - M: 680 F: 1
2009/10 - M: 507 F: 1
2010/11 - M: 171 F: 2
2011/12 - M: 266 F: 1

The major wars started with SS gaining the Steve Irwin giving them some ability to slow the whaling, that was the 2006/7 season. In the 2010/11 season they had multiple boats in the fight for the first time, bringing in the Bob Baker and Ady Gil.

I'd say they are having some effect.

Hopefully if they continue to gain more ships themselves and slow the catch more, it will just become totally uneconomic for Japan to keep sending whalers down here, to the point where they simply can't justify the expense.