Whaling Nations Seek a New Justification for Whaling
"If we can imagine a horse having two or three explosive spears stuck into its stomach and being made to pull a butcher’s truck through the streets of London while it pours blood in the gutter, we shall have an idea of the present method of killing. The gunners themselves admit that if whales could scream the industry would stop, for nobody would be able to stand it."
He was describing whales killed with harpoons with explosive grenade heads.
Today, the harpoon with an explosive (penthrite) head is still the main method
of killing whales.
The grenades used today are no less inhumane
than those used in the time when Dr Lillie was so horrified by observing whaling
operations. That's just one of the reasons why calls for the deliberate
reduction of whale populations would have been unthinkable even a few years ago.
Today, they are increasingly common.
The desire by some countries to lift the International Whaling Commission's (IWC's) moratorium on commercial whaling and cull (i.e., kill), more whales comes at a time of widespread declines in commercially important fish stocks and corresponding declines in commerical fisheries.
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) informs us that 75 percent of the world's fishery resources are fully or over exploited.
In order to keep marine life plentiful for future generations, we are told, "management of the world's marine resources must change." We must, "base our decisions on sound science, taking into account the complexity of the entire ecosystem."
For whaling nations like Japan and Norway, this means a resumption of commercial whaling and culling (i.e., killing) more whales. For others, it means acknowledging the complexity of marine ecosystems, and taking a precautionary approach to the management of commercial fisheries and whaling.
It also means acknowledging the scientific evidence that a whale cull could not only fail to benefit fisheries, it might actually be detrimental to fishing interests. Initiating a whale cull therefore is not something that should be undertaken without careful consideration of its likely consequences.
IFAW's "Whales and Fisheries" brochure (Click a Download button at the right to view a pdf of this brochure in English, Spanish, French, Arabic or Japanese) examines this issue and makes the following points:
- More than 75 percent of world fisheries are fully or over-exploited today (FAO 2000).
- Over-fishing by humans is the major cause of depleted fish stocks.
- Before commercial whaling depleted the great whales, there was no shortage of fish in the sea.
- The idea that because whales eat fish, fewer whales would mean more fish is overly simplistic.
- Ironically, because whales eat the predators or competitors of commercially important fish, a whale cull could result in a reduction in the numbers of commercially important fish.
- Furthermore, "There is no scientific evidence that the culling of large marine predators has ever benefited a commercial fishery." (William Montevecchi 1996).
