trying to save our whales

[eve]

A letter to Japan's prime minister, Mr Junichiro Koizumi, from Australia's PM, John Howard, saying that whales were a "great delight" for tourists and that there was no basis for killing whales as part of a scientific program, has failed to win diplomatic attention in Tokyo. Mr Koizumi's office confirmed that it had arrived but deflected further inquiries to the Dept of Foreign Affairs which, in turn, brushed it off.

Mr Howard said yesterday that pursuing a diplomatic path in trying to convince Japan to drop its controversial plans to increase its whaling program was the "sensible" thing to do because Japan was a "close friend of Australia".
Australia is opposed to whaling and is campaigning against Japan's proposal that it take more whales and add more species to its scientific quota.

There is no controversy about whaling in Japan; green groups keep a low profile.

[adam antichrist]

Yeah, a very stern letter is the way to get things done. And now we can't say he didn't do anything.
You know, if George W had've just sent a stern letter to Osama back in 2000, 11/9 would never have happened! No wonder he lets John Howard make coffee for him.

[Pilaf]

This is a very sad situation. Whaling is such a barbaric and archaic pastime, and the whales are such beutiful and intelligent creatures. If only there were a way to really convince that man that his policies were wrong. In America, petitions and angry letters really work. In Japan....well.... the Animal Liberation Front knows what to do.

[eve]

Australia is doing all it can at the IWC meeting this week, but Environment Minister Ian Campbell says there's an attempt to stall a vote on a resumption of commercial whaling, as countries like Japan rally to get the numbers it needs. Earlier, whaling countries led by Japan were to present a proposal outlining a return to commercial catches, despite suffering a setback in their campaign.

The pro-whaling lobby on Monday failed to garner even a simple majority in procedural voting, meaning that any proposal to introduce commercial whaling - requiring a three-quarters majority - was all but certain to fail.

See the full article in the Australian abc on-line: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200506/s1397050.htm

[eve]

The ABC news on-line today reported that the Nauruan government today defended its support for commercial whaling, saying it was concerned about the effects of whales on tuna stocks. The vote in favour of a revised management system at last week's International Whaling Commission meeting in Korea was taken in the best interests of the country's people, Nauru's ambassador to the UN, Marlene Moses, said.

Environmental agencies attending the IWC meeting said the Nauruan delegate arrived late and was surrounded by Japanese officials as soon as he reached the venue in Ulsan. Australia's Environment Minister Ian Campbell complained that he was not allowed to even speak to the delegate before the vote, which was lost 23-29.

"Some media reports have suggested that Nauru's decision to become a member of the IWC and its vote were heavily influenced by other member nations, including Japan, Australia and New Zealand.

"Recent criticism in the media concerning Nauru's involvement in the IWC is an unfair intrusion on Nauru's sovereignty," Ms Moses said in a statement. She says the govt of Nauru is a responsible government, and they have a voice on issues concerning the Pacific Ocean and their decision to vote for commercial whaling was carefully considered. "Some whale species have the potential to devastate our tuna stocks and, as a country whose food security and economy relies heavily on fishing, it is our responsibility to ensure the sustainability of our people's livelihoods."

Japan makes no secret that it champions the theory that whales take large numbers of commercial species of fish, such as tuna, although Senator Campbell said scientific data had shown that to be untrue.

[Kevster]

Shark/whale? They both swim in water so rather than create a new thread thought i'd stick this news here. That tuna thing sounds a bit weird, i don't reckon culling a few sharks would make much difference, better stop attracting them in. But that would impair the tuna industry....

'I was punching and kicking the great white shark. Its dorsal fin was right in front of my face
By Nick Squires in Port Lincoln
(Filed: 01/10/2005)

Jake Heron was preparing to catch the last wave of the day when the ocean's most feared predator struck without warning.

The great white shark erupted from the water beside him, bit deep into his right arm and leg and knocked him off his surfboard.'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/01/wjaws01.xml

[adam antichrist]

Shark/whale? They both swim in water so rather than create a new thread thought i'd stick this news here. That tuna thing sounds a bit weird, i don't reckon culling a few sharks would make much difference, better stop attracting them in. But that would impair the tuna industry....

'I was punching and kicking the great white shark. Its dorsal fin was right in front of my face
By Nick Squires in Port Lincoln
(Filed: 01/10/2005)

Jake Heron was preparing to catch the last wave of the day when the ocean's most feared predator struck without warning.

The great white shark erupted from the water beside him, bit deep into his right arm and leg and knocked him off his surfboard.'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/01/wjaws01.xml

Notice the line 'last wave of the day'? As a surfer I know that every surfer learns very early on that attacks only occur at dawn and dusk, when sharks come in to feed. Admittedly, some days it is hard to leave the water but this guy knew the risks. It's not like he never heard of shark attacks before.

[Kevster]

Sea Shepherd in Oz.

http://www.whale100000.org/

[Geoff]

They just announced that Today Tonight (Ch7 6:30pm) tomorrow will be live from an anti whaling ship. They didn't say which one but I presume that it's the Farley Mowat.

[adam antichrist]

They just announced that Today Tonight (Ch7 6:30pm) tomorrow will be live from an anti whaling ship. Thay didn't say which one but I presume that it's the Farley Mowat.

I learned in my course this year that blue whales feed on krill which gathers west of tasmania during summer. Apparantly the whalers never found this area of cold water upwelling (nutrients driven to the surface by warm winds, attracting krill and whales to feed on the plankton) which is possibly the only reason the blue whales were not driven to extinction.

I now wish I was going with the Sea Shep crew more than ever, I would love to see a blue whale. They are the largest animal ever to exist.

[eve]

I wrote to my Fed MP:
Dear Minister
The planned increase in whaling of fin and minke whales in Antarctica is
most distressing. What can be done to stop this? Can you please say what
you are doing to protect the whale watch industry of Hervey Bay, and
what you are doing to counter this supposed "scientific" action?
Please do all you can to protect these beautiful creatures.
Yours sincerely
Today there was a reply:
Thank you for your e-mail to Mr Truss. Your correspondence has been
processed for consideration.

[Kevster]

'12/25/2005

Sea Shepherd Requests the Australian Navy to Keep the Peace in Antarctica

Commentary by Paul Watson
Sea Shepherd Conservation Society

It is time for the government of Australia to act responsibly in the Australian Antarctic Territory.

Australia needs to send a naval ship to keep the peace and to observe for themselves what is going on down in the Southern Ocean instead of believing every lie that Japan fabricates to defend their bogus research commercial whaling operations.

The Japanese whaling fleet is in flagrant violation of numerous international and Australian laws by killing whales off the coast of Antarctica in waters claimed by Australia.

The Japanese have rammed a Greenpeace ship and attempted to ram my ship the Farley Mowat on Christmas day.

Prime Minister John Howard said that at a recent meeting with Japanese Prime
Minister Junichiro Koizumi that, “I do not support action which endangers lives or breaks the law."

He was referring to those of us defending the whales when in reality it is the Japanese breaking the laws and endangering human life and inhumanely killing whales.

When I warned that the Japanese were armed and were planning to damage our ship, Environment Minister Ian Campbell spun the story to suggest that it was the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society that were the bad guys and said, “There appears to be a prima facie case that they may be setting out to break the law.”

He has asked the Ministry of Justice to investigate Sea Shepherd yet Japan is openly breaking Australian law without any action by Australia.

What is curious about this is that Campbell is acknowledging that Australia has the right to investigate and lay charges against a Canadian flag vessel and non-Australian citizens over a Japanese complaint coming from the Australia Antarctic Territory. Yet he claims that Australian has no right to enforce conservation laws against Japan.

Australia must send a Naval vessel down here to see what is going on and to keep the peace. What if the Japanese kill or injure one or more of the whale defenders? Will Australia intervene then or will they intervene to appease Japan by arresting those defending the whalers?

This is a highly dangerous situation down here. Volunteers from around the world are here to do the job that the world’s governments should be doing. The Japanese are aggressive, violent, and arrogant. The whale defenders are determined, courageous, and bold. This is a recipe for disaster, Mr. John Howard and Mr. Ian Campbell.

You will not be very popular if the Japanese kill one of us because Australia did nothing to keep the peace.
The government says that the Japanese do not recognize the Australian claim to the Antarctic treaty. In 1942, they did not recognize Australia’s claim to Australia. Australians fought them and won, yet today’s leaders bow and surrender to Japan.

Japanese money has succeeded today, where Japanese military might failed in the past.

We, who Howard and Campbell consider the bad guys, are asking for the Navy to sail south to protect the lives of whales and people. If our intentions were criminal, would we be requesting the Navy?

Send the Navy to keep the peace. That is the responsible thing to do. If Australia has eyes down here, Australia will have the facts and then the Australian government can stop acting like a public relations firm hired by Tokyo.'

http://www.seashepherd.org/editorials/editorial_051225_1.html

[Kevster]

I often find the English government an embarrassment, but....

'Meanwhile, Australian Environment Minister Ian Campbell is accusing Sea Shepherd of endangering the factory ship Nisshin Maru on Christmas Day.

To this, Captain Watson responds, "The video clearly shows that it was the Farley Mowat that had the right of way and the Nisshin Maru attempted to ram our ship. Despite this evidence, when the Japanese complain, Campbell goes running to appease Tokyo. Is there no limit to how low these politicians will go to kow tow to Japan over trade agreements?"

Captain Watson has informed Ian Campbell that if he has charges against Sea Shepherd or himself, he will return to Australia to face whatever charges Australia can concoct.

"Stop threatening us and charge us if you believe we are acting unlawfully. Stop posing for the Japanese. Show us you have authority down here in these waters Mr. Campbell, charge us, and then explain how you have authority over me as a Canadian on a Canadian ship but not the Japanese who are in blatant violation of international conservation and Australian laws in Australian territorial waters?"'

Full report:

http://www.seashepherd.org/news/media_051230_1.html

[ricky]

Last night on 'Sixty Minutes', the first section was about the Japanese whaling down here, and Capt Paul Watson of Sea Shepherd was interviewed. Seems to reveal quite a difference in tactics between Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd. I must say that to me, Capt Watson made much more sense - his intent is to get the whalers out of the ocean, whereas Greenpeace likes to make publicity for themselves.

Whilst I found the smug Japanese person quite loathsome, but he made sense in one aspect - that the aim of Greenpeace is to maintain their huge organisation, and make money to do that, whereas Sea Shepherd is a small outfit trying to get rid of 'legitimate science'. Any donations to them simply pays for equipment.

Did anyone else see the program?

[Geoff]

Last night on 'Sixty Minutes', the first section was about the Japanese whaling down here, and Capt Paul Watson of Sea Shepherd was interviewed. Seems to reveal quite a difference in tactics between Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd. I must say that to me, Capt Watson made much more sense - his intent is to get the whalers out of the ocean, whereas Greenpeace likes to make publicity for themselves.

Whilst I found the smug Japanese person quite loathsome, but he made sense in one aspect - that the aim of Greenpeace is to maintain their huge organisation, and make money to do that, whereas Sea Shepherd is a small outfit trying to get rid of 'legitimate science'. Any donations to them simply pays for equipment.

Did anyone else see the program?

Yes, I saw it and agree with you about Greenpeace. They wouldn't broadcast their position (in the ocean) because they didn't want Sea Shepherd to find them and join in the protest! My money is now going to Sea Shepherd and NOT Greenpeace, although they do some good work.

[Nest]

Yes, I saw it and agree with you about Greenpeace. They wouldn't broadcast their position (in the ocean) because they didn't want Sea Shepherd to find them and join in the protest! My money is now going to Sea Shepherd and NOT Greenpeace, although they do some good work.
I agree with both of you - and ditto about the donations. :)

[eve]

Scientists fear Japanese whaling threatens humpback numbers. They have found that humpback whales in the Pacific have not recovered from commercial whaling.

They are also concerned future Japanese whaling could harm humpback whale populations.

Scientists from the International Whaling Commission are meeting in Hobart this week to discuss what has happened to humpback numbers since commercial whaling ended in 1973.

Read article here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200604/s1607226.htm

[eve]

There was a huge demo at Hervey Bay today, just half an hour's drive from where I live. But I didn't know about it until it was over and I saw it on the local TV. It was against the whale slaughter. The scene showed whales playing about in the sea, and the boats that take people whale watching were choc-a-bloc full of people, plus crowds on the quayside.

Then when I sat down to scan the local rag, there was a picture of our local State Member, plus our mayor, and the Fraser Coast Tourism guy all holding up a National Day of Action for the Whales poster. Of course if whales disappear, where would the multimillion dollar whale-watching business be? Though I must say that people just love coming to the area to simply watch the whales play, and everyone agrees it is ghastly that the Japanese come and aim harpoons that explode inside their bodies, all in the guise of "science". There was one old bloke who said he can't help but cry when he watches the whales play. :)

[eve]

The International Whaling Commission will meet in the Caribbean this week, and Japan is pushing for a return to commercial whaling.

Labor environment spokesman Anthony Albanese says the Government should take the pro-whaling nations to the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea.

"Australia needs to do more than every two weeks prior to an IWC meeting, travel around and talk to people about these issues, we actually need to show people that we're serious," he said.

And so say all of us.

[treehugga]

Agreed :)

[veggiewoman]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5066538.stm

Sunday, 11 June 2006, 21:36 GMT 22:36 UK


Whaling nations set for majority

By Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News website
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/999999.gif


http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gif
poils of "science"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/inline_dashed_line.gif
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/opennews.gifEnlarge Image (http://javascript<b></b>: void window.open('http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/sci_nat_enl_1131453097/html/1.stm', '1131453186', 'toolbar=0,scrollbars=0,location=0,statusbar=0,men ubar=0,resizable=1,width=700,height=518,left=312,t op=100');)

Pro-whaling nations look set to command a majority of the votes when the International Whaling Commission (IWC) annual meeting begins on Friday.
Several countries which appear likely to vote with the pro-whaling bloc have joined the body in recent weeks.
UK marine affairs minister Ben Bradshaw said he is "very concerned".
A pro-whaling majority could lead to the scrapping of conservation and welfare programmes, though not a return to full-scale commercial whaling.
That would need three-quarters of delegates at the meeting in St Kitts & Nevis to vote in favour, which is extremely unlikely.
But a simple majority would be enough to end IWC work on issues which Japan believes to be outside its remit, such as welfare and killing methods, whale-watching and anything concerning small cetaceans such as dolphins.
"For the first time since the 1970s, the IWC would be under the control of the whalers," commented Vassily Papastavrou, a marine biologist working with the International Fund for Animal Welfare (Ifaw).
"Japan has said that it intends to undermine decisions which protect whales and stop the conservation work of the IWC," he told the BBC News website.
Divided world
The potential for collision is higher at this year's meeting than it has been for decades.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gifhttp://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif Hindus don't eat beef, that's their choice, but they don't try to prohibit the rest of the world from eating it http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif


Rune Frovik

Formed in 1946, the IWC's original purpose was to regulate commercial whaling; and after it became obvious that some species were being depleted to the verge of extinction, that regulation took the most robust form possible: a global moratorium.
Norway made a formal objection to the ban and has continued to hunt, though catching radically fewer numbers than a century ago. Japan, and more recently Iceland, hunt under an IWC ruling which allows nations to catch whales for "scientific research".
Both have stepped up the size of their annual hunts in recent years, with the 2006 catch on target to exceed 2,000, the largest take since the introduction of the moratorium in 1986.
Pro-whaling nations insist that a limited return to commercial hunting is possible; stocks of some species are high enough, they maintain, charging that the IWC has become an organisation dedicated to preventing whaling, contrary to its purpose.
At the IWC's foundation is supposed to be sound science; arguments such as which stocks are sufficiently robust to hunt are in theory answered on a strict scientific basis.
But there are huge variations in estimates of minke whales, the species currently most hunted, which makes it almost impossible to set global catch limits.
The scientific process has also become mired in politics, with decade-long discussions on a mechanism called the Revised Management Scheme, designed to facilitate a return to limited commercial whaling, breaking down earlier this year.
The anti-whaling bloc is now led informally by Australia, New Zealand and Britain, with the US a major ally
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41748000/jpg/_41748784_benbradshawbbc203.jpg Ben Bradshaw: "Very concerned" about support for whaling

Within the last year this group has co-ordinated letters of diplomatic protest to Norway and Japan, signed by 12 and 17 countries respectively.
"They are losing the argument, internationally and domestically," said Ben Bradshaw.
"None of the pro-whaling nations have markets for the meat; young Japanese, Icelanders and Norwegians don't eat it, consumption is falling."
This argument is countered by organisations supportive of whalers and whaling, such as Norway's High North Alliance.
"We think there is growing support for whaling in principle and in practice," said its secretary Rune Frovik.
"Whales belong to the animal kingdom. In some cultures they eat frogs, others don't; Hindus don't eat beef, that's their choice, but they don't try to prohibit the rest of the world from eating it.
"And we think that you can't find anything more environmentally friendly than whale meat - this is an animal which lived in nature, we are harvesting nature's surplus and you don't have to destroy nature to do that."
Horse trading
Whatever the moral rights and wrongs, it seems like that after years of trying the pro-whaling bloc may have built itself a working majority this time.
The run-up to each IWC meeting sees the opposing groups of nations trying to bring supportive new members into the organisation.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gifTHE LEGALITIES OF WHALING
Objection - A country formally objects to the IWC moratorium, declaring itself exempt
Scientific - A nation issues unilateral 'scientific permits'; any IWC member can do this
Aboriginal - IWC grants permits to indigenous groups for subsistence food

The Marshall Islands, Guatemala and Cambodia have reportedly joined in recent weeks at Japan's behest.
But an accurate tally will only be possible when the Commission convenes on Friday in St Kitts; only then will it become clear which countries have sent delegates and paid their subscriptions, entitling them to vote.
"[The pro-whaling nations] had a majority last year on paper," said Ben Bradshaw, "but because some of their allies failed to turn up or pay their dues we won all the votes - but one of them by only one vote."
The fallout of a pro-whaling majority would be, in Mr Bradshaw's words, "international uproar".
How far the anti-whaling leaders would be prepared to go diplomatically against Japan, Iceland and Norway, with whom they have so much common ground on issues other than whaling, is a moot point.
There is talk of action aimed at the tourism industries of countries which have recently supported whaling, especially the small Caribbean states such as this year's host, St Kitts and Nevis. A delegate from one of the anti-whaling nations told the BBC News website there would not be an organised boycott, but the word would be put out that certain nations which portray themselves as holiday destinations resplendent with natural beauty had supported the killing of whales. Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk (Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk)

[eve]

Greenpeace says it expects to be thrown out of tomorrow's International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting on the Carribean Island of St Kitts.

Australia is leading the anti-whaling campaign but conservation groups are concerned that this year Japan, Norway and Iceland may have the numbers to secure a majority vote. Japan wants Greenpeace penalised for an ocean clash between their Arctic Sunrise and the Japanese whaling fleet earlier this year. Greenpeace expedition leader Shane Rattenbury says the group may lose its observer status at the hearing. The third item on the IWC agenda will be introduced by Japan and is titled "interference with scientific research".

On the eve of the meeting, Australia is doing last-minute lobbying in its campaign to stop global whaling. There are now 70 members of the IWC, with at least four countries recently signing up. International Fund For Animal Welfare (IFAW) spokesman Joth Singh says if pro-whaling countries win the vote, that will see key conservation issues removed from the agenda.

Japan is expected to secure a slim majority but all countries must be present at the commission meeting for their vote to count. Guatemala is not expected to attend and it is believed the Solomon Islands may abstain from key votes.

[eve]

The UK 'Independent' reports that Japan is to put plans to kill humpback whales before a meeting of the International Whaling Commission, the body that regulates world whaling. The Japanese claim the whales will be used for "scientific research", a loophole that gives a licence to kill.

Yesterday, the Australian government described the plans as an "outrage", and Britain has also protested. But Tokyo has made it clear that it will press ahead with the slaughter - and the killing of increased numbers of other whale species - whatever the reaction.

Humpback whales - whose haunting songs and breathtaking leaps have fired the imagination of hundreds of millions of people around the world - are on the official Red List of Threatened Species.

full article: http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article1090214.ece

[eve]

Humane Society wins right to file lawsuit against whalers. The full bench of the Federal Court has overturned a decision which stopped an animal rights group from suing a Japanese whaling company.

The Humane Society International (HSI) wants to sue a Japanese whaling company, which it says is unlawfully killing minke whales in Australian waters near Antarctica. A Federal Court judge last year refused to grant the group leave to file the legal action on the grounds that the company would not recognise any ruling and that it could jeopardise diplomatic relations between Australia and Japan.

But the full bench of the Federal Court has today upheld an appeal against that ruling, giving HSI leave to file the claim in Tokyo. It found that the original judge erred in deciding the case should not go ahead because it might be ignored and that he made a mistake in attaching weight to a political consideration.

[Kevster]

Sea Shepherd is back in Australia, currently docked in Melbourne.....

http://www.seashepherd.org/australia/australia_melbourne_FM_visit.html