Whaling 

 

• Commercial whaling
  
• Scientific whaling
  
• Subsistence whaling
  
• Which countries are still whaling?

Other threats

Commercial whaling

Commercial whaling likely began in the IX Century in the North Sea and in the XII Century in the Gulf of Gascogne. When right whale populations started to diminish over the course of the XVI Century in Europe, whalers headed for North America. Over the centuries, a veritable industry developed along the coasts of North America. Thousands of whales, right whales, rorqual whales, sperm whales, grey whales and several others, were hunted every year. The hunt intensified with the invention of the exploding harpoon and the advent of more powerful ships. From 1904 to 1985, over 2 million whales were taken in the Antarctic alone. This hunt led to several species being depleted to the point of near extinction.

In 1946—after it became obvious that whale populations had been overexploited—the International Whaling Commission (IWC) was created. Its mandate was to ensure sufficient conservation of whale populations so that sustainable harvesting could continue. In 1982, IWC member countries imposed a moratorium on commercial whaling. This moratorium was supposed to last form 1986 to 1990. It is still in place. However, according to the convention signed in 1946, any member is free to oppose a resolution—such as the one that led to the moratorium—and thus grant themselves commercial quotas. Norway did just that in 1982. Before actually resuming commercial whaling, this country pursued a scientific whaling programme targeting minke whales. They killed 289 whales per year from 1988 to 1995. In 1993 they began commercial whaling again; 700 minke whales per year are killed in Norway’s territorial waters. The meat is sold locally. Norway has been attempting to resume whale product exports—particularly whale blubber, which Norwegians do not consume—despite the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). Yet their products have been rejected by Japan, their main potential client, due to high contaminant levels, especially PCBs. Iceland is now also planning to resume commercial whaling in 2006. Until then, it is conducting scientific whaling.

Certain IWC member countries have long since given up on the hunt and fiercely oppose any resumption of commercial whaling. The principal arguments of these countries are practical in nature; several whale populations that were rendered fragile by past whaling activities would not be able to support commercial whaling. According to these countries, regulating and monitoring this hunt, along with the trade that would ensue, would be impossible. Several environmental groups share this position. Some are opposed for moral reasons; whales are “special” creatures and hunting them is cruel. Adding to arguments against whaling are several threats that weigh on whales, such as pollution, climate change or Top of page

Scientific whaling

Intensive whaling furnished precious information concerning cetaceans. However, it also brought several species to the brink of extinction. Certain countries, like Japan, continue to hunt whales under the guise of science. The International Whaling Commission (IWC) convention signed in 1946 does, in fact, allow each member country the option of granting itself scientific whaling permits. Is this method still justifiable in the present context? Does scientific whaling contribute to science or does it mask commercial interests?

Japan and, as of 2003, Iceland are the only two countries with scientific whaling programmes. Japan began scientific whaling as soon as the 1986 moratorium came into force. It carries out two whaling programmes. The oldest takes place in Antarctica where Japan kills over 400 minke whales on an annual basis. This programme is aimed at estimating certain biological parameters—such as the natural death rate (sic)—and the study of the role of minke whales in the Antarctic ecosystem. The second programme, which began in 1994, involves the killing of 100 minke whales in the North Pacific. This programme is aimed at better understanding the feeding ecology of minke whales. In 2000, the Japanese also added Bryde’s whales and sperm whales to their hunt. In 2002, they added the sei whale. Whale products are sold on local markets as stipulated in the International Whaling Convention. Defenders of this hunt contend that it supplies new and useful information for the management of stocks of the whale species hunted.

Yet, scientific whaling programmes carried out by Japan and now Iceland are heavily criticized. For several years now during their annual meeting, IWC members have adopted resolutions encouraging Japan to abandon its programme. In 2002, Phil Clapham and his colleagues—all members of the IWC Scientific Committee—published Top of page

Subsistence whaling

As well as commercial and scientific whaling, certain countries also partake in what is known as subsistence whaling. According to the International Whaling Commission (IWC), subsistence whaling is hunting that is carried out by native peoples that share strong community, family, social and cultural bonds that connect them to a traditional dependence on whaling and whale products. Also, the purpose of the hunt must be for consumption by native peoples only and be aimed at meeting their cultural and nutritional requirements.

However, this definition does not have a general consensus. Among other things, there is some concern about the subjective nature of the definition of the word native. If the true definition is someone who was born in the country he or she inhabits, then are not Norwegians, Icelanders and inhabitants of the Faroe Islands natives, and should they not also be allowed to carry out subsistence whaling? There is also some controversy surrounding the definition of “subsistence”. If this term means ‘to meet the essential requirements’ of a native community, how is it that the products of subsistence whaling in Greenland—with the approval of the IWC—find their way onto the local market? What is the difference between this hunt and the one carried out by Norwegians, for example? And doesn’t commerce allow natives to meet their essential requirements? Also, doesn’t stopping natives from selling the products of their own resources limit their possibility of developing their economy? These are a few of the arguments put forward by those who question the concept of subsistence whaling.

Whatever the case may be, several countries carry out subsistence whaling. Some of them, such as Denmark (Greenland), Russia, the United States and the Caribbean islands of St. Vincent and the Grenadines hunt whales under permits and subsistence quotas granted by the IWC. Other countries—that are not members of the IWC—hunt according to their own rules. This is the case for Canada, the Faroe Islands, the islands of Dominica and St. Lucia in the Caribbean, Indonesia and the Philippines.

Top of page

Which countries are still whaling?

• Japan, member of the IWC, has a scientific permit and kills approximately 700 whales every year, mostly minke whales, but also about 50 Bryde’s whales and sei whales and 10 sperm whales. The Japanese also hunt small cetaceans; they kill more than 20 000 dolphins and porpoises annually in their coastal waters.
• Norway formally objected to the IWC moratorium and kills approximately 700 minke whales every year in its territorial waters.
• Iceland, which had stopped hunting in 1989 and had withdrawn from the IWC in 1991, re-joined the Commission in 2002 and has announced that it will begin commercial whaling in 2006. Until 2006, Iceland will carry out scientific whaling. A total of 36 minke whales were hunted in 2003; 25 in 2004.
• Greenland (Denmark) has an annual subsistence whaling quota of 19 fin whales and about 200 . Greenlanders also hunt nearly 500 narwhals and over 600 beluga whales annually, along with pilot whales and harbour porpoises.
• The native people of Chukotka, Russia share an IWC subsistence whaling quota with the Alaska Inuit (United States) of 280 bowhead whales and 620 grey whales from 2003 to 2006. They also hunt beluga whales and narwhals.
• Along with the subsistence-whaling quota that they share with the Chukotka natives, the Alaska Inuit (United States) also hunt a little over 200 beluga whales annually. The MakahÑan native tribe from Washington State (United States)Ñobtained an annual IWC subsistence-whaling quota of five grey whales in 1997. However, a federal appeal by environmental groups was upheld stopping the Makah from taking advantage of this permit.
• The Caribbean islands of St. Vincent and the Grenadines hunt several dozen short-finned pilot whales and a certain number of dolphins. As well, they possess an IWC subsistence-whaling permit for 20 humpback whales for 2003-2007. Dominica and St. Lucia—two other Caribbean islands that are not members of the IWC—hunt approximately 400 short-finned pilot whales and several species of dolphins.
• Canada, which withdrew from the IWC in 1982, regulates subsistence whaling. Over 1000 beluga whales and 300 to 400 narwhals are taken annually by Inuit hunters. Also, one bowhead whale is taken approximately every two years.
• The Faroe Islands—not a member of the IWC—annually hunt on average 1000 pilot whales and several dozen dolphins.
• Indonesia and the Philippines also hunt whales, but statistics for these countries are not well known. They hunt sperm whales, Bryde’s whales, killer whales and other small cetaceans.

Top of page