Japan Whaling Assoc. -Q&A-
Q2
Aren't  all whales endangered?
No  whales have ever been hunted to extinction, nor are they likely  to be. Out of all of the 80 species, only a limited number traditionally  have been hunted, such as blue whales, fin whales, minke whales,  humpback whales, sperm whales and gray whales.
When whales were over-hunted, species such as blue whales and  right whales were reduced to very low population levels, but  these species now have been fully protected for decades.
Japan strongly believes that they should continue to be protected.
On the other hand, there are species which are abundant enough that marine             management is needed, such as the Antarctic and northwestern Pacific minke             whales, northwestern Pacific Bryde's whales, and northwestern Pacific Sei             whales.
Q3
Aren't whales supposed to have a high level of intelligence?
Those  who assert that the whale has a higher intelligence base their  assertion on the large size of a whale's brain. It is simply  natural for a whale which has large head to have a larger brain  than those of other animals, but that does not necessarily mean  that it has higher intelligence.
In comparing the size of animal brains, we should take into  consideration not only its weight but also its proportion to  the body weight. The proportion of a blue whale's brain to its  body weight is 0.007% on the average, as compared with 1.93%  for human beings.
The harbor porpoise has the highest proportion of 0.85% among  cetaceans. Does that mean that the intelligence of a harbor  porpoise is half the level of a human being and that of a blue  whale is one hundredth of a harbor porpoise's? It is not necessarily  so. It is not possible to determine the intelligence level with  the brain's proportion to the body weight.
The late Dr. E.J. Slijper, who was a world authority on cetaceans,  said "...it seems improbable that an animal which propels itself  mainly with its tail should need a more highly developed brain  than, for instance, a monkey which uses all its limbs so skillfully."  On a similar note, Dr. Margaret Klinowska, a professor of Cambridge  University and a member of the Specialist Group of the IUCN  Species Survival Commission, said that "In most species of cetaceans,  the brain is neither very large nor especially complex," adding  that "whales betray little evidence of behavioral complexity  beyond that of a herd of cows or deer."
Q1
If  whaling is allowed again, what's to guarantee that over-exploitation  won't occur again?
Over-exploitation  could not happen again because of the stronger regulations and  checks and balances that would accompany any reintroduction.
The International Whaling Commission would control whaling if it were allowed again, just as it controls  the bans now.
Importantly the reason that many countries were involved in  whaling previously was for whale byproducts, such as oil and  bone, in contrast to countries and communities like Japan, Norway,  the native American Indians and many island nations that whaled  for food.
Q2
Is whaling still occurring today, even though there is a global ban?
There  are three types of whaling being carried out:
Aboriginal subsistence whaling
The International Whaling Commission authorizes this whaling.  The IWC now authorizes catches under its aboriginal subsistence  whaling scheme for:
1.Bowhead whales in Alaska(US) and Chukotka(Russia).
2.Gray whales in Washington(US) and Chukotka(Russia).
3.Fin whales and Minke whales in Greenland (Denmark).
4.Humpback whales in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
However, Japan's tradition of whaling is not recognised by the  IWC.
Small-type whaling outside of the IWC's jurisdiction
Catches of small cetaceans including Baird's beaked whales,  Pilot whales and Dall's porpoises occur within Japanese coastal  waters. These catches are outside the International Whaling  Commission's jurisdiction. The Government of Japan strictly  regulates these operations. Small cetaceans caught either in  directed fisheries or incidentally in other fisheries are used  for human consumption in many countries around the world.
Whaling by non-IWC member countries
Catches by non-IWC members include bowhead whales in Canada,  sperm whales in Indonesia. These countries are not bound by  the IWC regulations, as they are not members.
Q3
The whaling debate has shifted from scientific discussion to arguments on animal rights as perceived by certain countries and groups. Since most Western nations are opposed to whaling, why doesn't Japan just abandon its tradition?
We  cannot agree with this view. Asking Japan to abandon this part  of its culture would compare to Australians being asked to stop  eating meat pies, Americans being asked to stop eating hamburgers  and the English being asked to go without fish and chips.
Attitudes toward animals are a part of national cultures. No  nations should try to impose their attitudes on others.
Anti-whaling countries regard whales as sacred, and want the  ban on whaling to continue on the grounds that a humane killing  method is not ensured or that whaling itself is unethical.
But it is questionable whether the whaling conducted by westerners  in the past was humane or ethical. To this argument, the westerners  might respond that was the very reason for them to have halted  whaling.
But this argument is nothing but a misconception. Whaling in  western countries was conducted to collect whale oil, whether  it was ancient sailing-boat-type whaling or modern whaling.  It died out naturally as it lost its industrial importance after  petroleum became more readily available.
On the other hand, whaling in Japan was mainly carried out for  the production of meat, and because of strong demand for whalemeat  in the domestic market, whaling can still continue to be viable.
Not all western countries are anti-whaling although anti-whaling  attitudes are prevalent. Generally Anglo-Saxon countries take  an anti-whaling position, but Iceland, Norway and Denmark regard  whales as food.
Q4
There have been media reports of whale meat on the market in Japan from endangered species. What is the situation?
Products  from species of large whale other than minke whale in the market  could have originated from several sources including meat stored  frozen from before the moratorium on commercial whaling, by-products  from past scientific catches by Iceland and Norway, stranding,  or by-catch.
Illegal catches or trade are unlikely sources since the Government  of Japan has strict regulations that prohibits whaling for species  regulated by the IWC in compliance with the moratorium on commercial  whaling and because the import of whale meat from non-IWC member  countries is prohibited by regulation.
DNA analyses of samples of whale products currently distributed  in the Japanese markets conducted by the Fisheries Agency of  Japan and Traffic-Japan have not substantiated any illegal catches  or trade.
Media reports of illegal whale meat in Japanese markets have  come from DNA analyses conducted by scientists from New Zealand  and the U.S.A. Contrary to standard scientific practice, samples  used as the basis for their reports have not been provided for  verification.
There are other matters of scientific procedures that seriously  question the credibility of these reports. The IWC's Scientific  Committee has rejected consideration of some of these reports.
Q1
Is the research being undertaken by Japan in the Southern Ocean an illegal activity not authorised by the International Whaling Commission?
In  Article VIII of the International Convention for the Regulation  of Whaling (ICRW), the Contracting Parties have an unrestricted  right to take whales for scientific research. Japan is a signatory  to this Convention.
When the commercial whaling moratorium was introduced in 1982,  the main reason the anti-whaling nations gave for its introduction  was the uncertainty surrounding the scientific data then available.  In other words, they argued that safe management of whales was  not possible because knowledge of the number of whales, age  composition, sex ratio, and natural mortality rate was ambiguous.
The research catch by Japan was launched to answer such questions  and resolve the uncertainties.
Many members of the IWC Scientific Committee recognize the importance  of the research, and value highly their results. However, during  the past several years, the IWC anti-whaling majority has repeatedly  passed resolutions calling on Japan to reconsider the current  research catch and insisting that research should be limited  to non-lethal methods.
Anti-whaling proponents have tried to label the research catch  as commercial whaling in disguise, but this is a tactic to discredit  the research effort.
In the research program, the vessels are run on a predesigned  track formulated by scientists, and conduct surveys and collects  specimens such as earplug and ovaries. After scientific examination  and removal of tissue and organ samples, the remains of the  whales are frozen and marketed in compliance with the provisions  of the Convention, which forbid any part of the carcass to be  wasted. However, as the cost of research is expensive, the proceeds  from sales of whale meat and parts alone cannot cover the costs.  The Government of Japan pays the remainder of the costs.
The research is carried out by the Institute of Cetacean Research  (ICR), a semi-governmental organization of the Japan Fisheries  Agency, established in 1987.
Q2
How often is research conducted?
Japan  currently conducts the whale sampling research in the Antarctic  and the northwest Pacific.
There is need to carry out the research every year as the number  of samples collected and the area surveyed by one cruise per  year is very limited, particularly given the size of the Antarctic  Ocean.
The data necessary for the management of the whale resources  must show changes in trends over time. Continuous sampling is  indispensable to enhance the accuracy of the research.
Q3
What are the types of research into whales?
There  are two broad types of research which are conducted into whales.  Non-lethal and lethal.
There are advantages and disadvantages associated with both  lethal and non-lethal methods. For example, non-lethal methods  are inadequate for population research of whales, as well as  other marine life, but is suitable for examining whale behaviour  in slow-swimming species.
A large range of information is needed for the management and  conservation of whales, such as population, age structure, growth  rates, age of maturity, reproductive rates, feeding, nutrition  and levels of contaminants. This type of important information  cannot be obtained through small DNA samples or analysis of  organochlorine, but only through lethal research.
The Japanese whale research program has obtained valuable information  on whales by using non-lethal and lethal research.It has also  enabled us to calculate the amount of fish consumed by whales  - which is approximately between 280 million tonnes and 500  million tonnes per year. In contrast, humans harvest around  90 million tonnes of fish each year.
Q4
Benefits from Japan's research program have not been promoted so it must be just a cover for whaling.
This  is not true. There have been dozens of scientific reports and  information made available to the public in brochures on the  findings of the Japanese research program.
The difficulty faced by the Japanese researchers is the interest  of western media, who have failed to run stories in newspapers  etc about the results. The results are available on the The  Institute of Cetacean Research Website: http://www.icrwhale.org/eng-index.htm
Q5
Why does Japan conduct whale research in the Southern Ocean when it is an international whale sanctuary?
It  is important to understand that the Southern Ocean Sanctuary  applies only to commercial whaling. It does not apply to research.  Japan's research catch of whales in the Antarctic is perfectly  legal under Article VIII of the Convention which provides that  any contracting Government may issue a special permit authorising  the take of whales for scientific purposes.
The proposal to establish a Southern Ocean whale sanctuary,  which abruptly came up at the 1992 IWC meeting, was a political  push by anti-whaling nations to put an end to whaling regardless  of reason. It was also an attempt to drive a wedge between Japan,  which wishes to establish a system of conservation and sustainable  use of marine resources in all areas, and such countries as  Norway and Iceland that seek to resume whaling in their national  waters.
The anti- whaling forces sought to impose a total ban on whaling  in the Antarctic regardless of the fact that the IWC has the  ability to safely manage the sustainable use of the areas abundant  whales including a population of over 760,000 fast-reproducing  minke whales. The proposal was adopted in 1994, without regard  to scientific evidence that argued against the need for a sanctuary.
The scientific evidence researched by the IWC's Scientific Committee  demonstrated up to 2,000 minke whales could be taken each year  without any impact on their population. This is the basis on  which Japan is making its request for establishment of a commercial  whaling quota. Of even more concern is that the creation of  the Southern Ocean whale sanctuary is the imbalance this is  causing to the ecosystem.
It is common sense in wildlife resource management that excessive  protection of only one part of an ecosystem, especially the  component at the top of the food chain, except when it is at  a very low stock level, will impair the balance of the ecosystem  as a whole and will invite instability of the resources in question.
Q1
Why was the International Whaling Commission established?
The  International Whaling Commission was established by the 1946  International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. The  IWC's objective is: "to provide for the proper conservation  of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development  of the whaling industry." However, the IWC is now ignoring an  important element of its objective - the orderly development  of the industry.
The IWC is now controlled by a majority anti-whaling group backed  up by anti-whaling non-governmental organizations, which has  lead to various stringent regulations against whaling, one after  another, which caused the IWC to deviate from its original objectives.
The most conspicuous example of the violation of the Convention  was the adoption of a commercial whaling moratorium in 1982.  The Convention requires that all conservation measures shall  be based on scientific findings, and the IWC Scientific Committee  has never recommended a moratorium in the past.
The moratorium was achieved by anti-whaling groups like Greenpeace  recruiting into the IWC many countries that had nothing to do  with whaling, thus giving the anti-whaling forces the majority  they needed.
The blatant disregard of the objectives and provisions of the  1946 Convention is not only in violation of the Convention but  also violates the Vienna Convention on interpretation of Treaties,  which requires "good faith" implementation of international  treaties.
Q2
How many countries are members of the International Whaling Commission?
The  IWC was established in 1948 under the ICRW concluded in 1946.
Initially it started with 15 whaling nations but began to give  a stronger emphasis to conservation of whales since the 1960s  when the Netherlands and the United Kingdom stopped whaling  after their whaling industry was no longer profitable because  of over-exploitation of whales.
From the latter half of the 1970s, new members seeking solely  to ban whaling joined the commission, resulting in the passage  of a commercial whaling moratorium in 1982 by their majority  vote.
The present IWC membership is 88 nations. Among them, the number of countries             supporting whaling tends to increase in these days.
Anglo-Saxon countries, like the United Kingdom, New Zealand,  Australia and the United States have a hard-line policy against  whaling.