Baby Beluga might never sing again if Japanese whalers keep up their dirty, underhanded politics. The Japanese commercial whaling industry has continued in spite of the 1986 International Whaling Commission (IWC) whaling practice ban, by operating under the ‘scientific research’ loophole. This loophole has perpetuated the whaling controversy which has continued to heat up and reached scalding points. People are openly objecting to Japan’s scientific research cover to continue whaling and now, violence is amounting. To prevent fatalities, plans to reach a compromise between anti-whalers and whalers are being researched. This past January, Nature Online reported one such plan that presents a market-based proposal designed by environmental scientists that involves a quota scheme. Anti-whalers can simply buy the lives of whales from whalers. This way, anti-whalers save whale lives and whalers don’t lose profit. Not only is the plan insulting, but even if considered objectively, it would never work. The plan instead would promote the whaling business and would even attract other countries interest that would start whaling to gain profit (WDCS).
Japan has defended its continued whaling practice by reasoning of the Japanese culture and that whale meat is a staple in the Japanese market. Both reasons though, hold little worth. Though Japan has had a long whaling history, the modern terminology does not resemble what whaling was. Whales are being hunted into extinction and are inhumanely killed. Also, the Japanese consumption of whale meat is very low. Thousands of tons of whale meat remain untouched, locked away in a freezer and will probably stay that way (Time).
Since Japan cannot adequately support their reasoning for the continued practice of whaling, they have adopted the cover of scientific research granted by the IWC to continue to make money. The IWC “…is a group of 88 nations, including Japan, who have signed a convention to coordinate with each other for the development and maintenance of sustainable whale stocks (Sea Shepherds).” In 1986, the IWC placed a ban on commercial whaling but allowed a loophole that allowed whaling in the name of science. Japan uses this loophole to its advantage and created the Institute of Cetacean Research (ICR), which is supposedly designed to “…help gather scientific data to be used for the management of whale stocks (Sea Shepherds).” Unfortunately for Japan, they aren’t fooling anyone.
While the ICR may do some research, the consensus of governments and scientists in general, including the scientific community within the IWC, questions the research quality. It is argued that the number of whales killed is too high for the necessary research and that non-lethal methods could achieve the same research objectives. It’s also been stated that the research produced has little of real value (Sea Shepherds).
The nation is on to Japan’s scheme and people are not happy. Opposition is so high that violence is breaking out. Animal Planet hosts a show titled “Whale Wars” that captures the fatal nature of the controversy by following anti-whalers who will do anything to stop the killing of whales. The TV show does not hold back and has people worried over the bloodshed. This concern has lead to investigations trying to reach a peaceful compromise between whalers and anti-whalers. In the Nature Online article “Whales for sale,” a market-based plan is presented with high hopes for achieving this feat. Unfortunately, the plan will never work despite the optimistic tone of Nature Online. In fact, it would have negative results that would cause even more harm.
The plan, which was outlined by three environmental scientists, constructs a quota system, which allows environmental groups to buy whales from whalers who in turn will not lose a profit. The scientists feel that, “under the scheme, conservationists could buy (and retire) the quotas from whalers, giving industry a way to profit from the animals without killing them. In return, anti-whaling campaigners could be more certain that their actions were reducing the slaughter (Nature Online).” According to Nature Online:
Theoretically, such a scheme would allow both sides to benefit with no loss of face. As the researchers say, it could “open the door to reducing mortality without needing to battle over whether whaling is honorable or shameful”. And both the number of whales killed and the associated costs would go down.While it may seem like a good way to prevent more violence from occurring, this plan will actually hinder the controversy and put the lives of whales into even more danger. According to the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS) in a response to the claims in Nature Online:
There are strong ethical reasons for this opposition (whales being viewed as just a commodity) but there are also practical and strategic reasons for not supporting this idea. These include the fact that buying the whales' lives would help prop up a dying industry and other countries could be encouraged to start or resume commercial whaling to claim their share.Whaling is a dying practice, but if money is going to start flowing into the business, the killing of whales will continue and quotas will be driven up. WDCS reported that if the whaling industry did start using the quota system, countries such as China and South Korea would jump on the whaling wagon.
The proposal defeats the whole anti-whaler purpose because the plan will lead to more inhumane whale slaughter. Anti-whalers will spend all what little money they have buying whale lives, but with the renewed interest in the business, quotas will be driven up and more whales will be killed. This proposal solves nothing because it will only increase violence.
Works Cited
"Whales for sale." Nature Online. 11 Jan 2012. 15 Feb. 2012. Web. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v481/n7380/full/481114a.html
"Proposal For Quotas To Save Whales Rejected By WDCS." Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society International. 12 Jan 2012. 15 Feb. 2012. Web. http://www.wdcs.org/news.php?select=1145
Sekiguchi, Toko.“Why Japan’s Whale Hunt Continues.” Time. 20 Nov. 2007. 15 Feb. 2012. Web. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1686486,00.html
“Sea Shepherds vs. Japanese Whaling Research.” Networked Democracy. 10 July 2010. 15 Feb. 2012. Web. http://www.networkeddemocracy.com/japan/sea-shepherds-vs-japanese-whaling-research/
Photo: http://www.wspa-international.org/latestnews/2011/japan-quits-whale-hunt.aspx
No comments:
Post a Comment