national

Anti-whalers dismiss 'sham' Australian surveillance

33 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2013 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

33 Comments
Login to comment

“It is dangerous down there, we’ve got a violent Japanese whaling fleet on the way with grenade-tipped harpoons and it is dangerous to get in the way of that and uphold the law,” he said.:

That's right it's dangerous so don't go within 500 yards of them. The only violence the Whalers are there to project is in the talking of whales. Unless some idiots decide to ram and attack them.

1 ( +13 / -12 )

Give them hell SS!

0 ( +17 / -17 )

“It is dangerous down there, we’ve got a violent Japanese whaling fleet on the way with grenade-tipped harpoons and it is dangerous to get in the way of that and uphold the law,” he said.

First, it's only dangerous because SS is spoiling for a fight; you follow someone and something happens, that's on you. Second, you're not upholding the law. Third, you're not authorized to uphold the law, and your non-upholding of the law is, itself, against the law, as has been determined in court. You know, the place where people are authorized to uphold the law.

6 ( +15 / -9 )

Bob Brown, as an ex-leader of The Greens, is perfectly aware that Australia cannot patrol territory that the vast majority of The World consider 'International waters'. If they were to try to take action down there, it would be big trouble. He is being a clown.

The SS don't need Government help. They do just fine as it is.

1 ( +11 / -10 )

Bob Brown, as an ex-leader of The Greens, is perfectly aware that Australia cannot patrol territory that the vast majority of The World consider 'International waters'

Australia CAN and IS patrolling waters which are considered as 'international waters' as any country around the world can. Australia can send warships there to accompany Japanese whalers. I think it's for the Japanese not for SS. They'll record every movement of SS and report that to the Australian and Japanese press if it will be contrary to international laws (like ramming other ship).

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Its just the 12 broken promises from Abbott. He has just lied his way to power in Australia by making big promises on everything, Within 3 months after winning the election, he has broken every single promise and a re-election should be called. Ifs time in History a a party has just lied on a mass scale to get to power.

He promised to send ships to stop them & watch them. Once again has broken his promise to all of Australia. Sending planes is going to what??

What are the planes going to say? Yeah we see them killing whales?? Its a WTF from Abbott.

WAIST OF TAX PAYERS MONEY & A CHEESY COVER UP TO WHAT HE PROMISED AUSTRALIAN'S.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

What are the planes going to say?

What would a ship do? It can't intervene as it is international waters. So it can take pictures from up close, yeah that will be real useful.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Japan's whalers are feeding a dying industry with blood.

Sea Shepherd is spending tens of thousands better spent simply paying whalers to stay in port and revise the economics of slaughter.

This said, both are playing at a silly game of self importance.

Even if Japan were to cease all whaling another "supplier" would step in to slaughter these amazing creatures.

Bottom line? Put whale in your selfish mouth to kill the oceans. That's some weird nationalist pride that is very hard to stomach.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

SS is spoiling for a fight and they just might get one that they may not be able to handle.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

What do you have to hide Sea Shepherd? Are you afraid that the truth that you guys are being the aggressors in this "whale war"?

Also Japan does need to cut back on this whaling thing. But how about you fire on the European nations and other whaling nations that actually say their doing it and don't give a hoot about you.

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

wakawaka225DEC. 24, 2013 - 11:06AM JST ...how about you fire on the European nations and other whaling nations that actually say their doing it..".

On what grounds did you come to the conclusion they are not?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

"They'll fly over and look from a great height. What are they going to do if something's going wrong down there? "

The Australian surveillance team would record the footage and show it to the world. That would be all that is required if something were to go wrong ever.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Chenchan

Australia CAN and IS patrolling waters which are considered as 'international waters' as any country around the world can. Australia can send warships there to accompany Japanese whalers. I think it's for the Japanese not for SS. They'll record every movement of SS and report that to the Australian and Japanese press if it will be contrary to international laws (like ramming other ship).

Chenchan, what is the point of sending Australian Navy Warships to monitor a whaling fleet? That's NOT what the Australian Navy is for, and it would create a terrible international row that could end up in the International Courts. And seeing that Australian claims to territory are not recognised by most countries, including Japan, it would almost amount to piracy and would be disastrous to Australia's own case against Japanese Whaling currently in the International Court. There is absolutely nothing to gain by doing so.

The Sea Shepherd already film what goes on down there - the Australian Navy is not a documentary team.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

what are the whalers going to do, pull out the 50cal and start mowing down the SS, LOL whalers are already unpopular killing somebody will just bring the international community down on them and play into SS hands. and SS know this. big difference is SS people are willing to put there lives on the line for something they believe in, are the whalers!?!?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Looking forward to watching Whale Wars this season.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

These Sea Shepherd guys are the sham. They claim they are upholding the law, despite the International Court of Justice not having given a ruling yet, as stated in the article.

Good on the Australian government. Sounds like they've done a cost-benefit analysis. Sending a plane must be much cheaper, and what is a boat supposed to do anyway? I doubt the Australian government has any interest in attacking the Japanese the way the Sea Shepherd shamsters do.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Hello, I'm in the United states and joined here just to ask a few questions of the Japanese people to help me understand why Whaling is so important to you.. First off I would like to express my love your culture and pay my respect to you.

I would like to know why it is so important to continue with the killing of whales to you?

Do you not understand that there are so few left?

Why does that not make any difference to the Japanese people?

These majestic creatures where here long before us, and hopefully they will be here long after we are gone, but not if people don't help them out. Japan is a country with deep conviction and culture. I just don't understand the importance of whale meat to you. Anyone that travels to Japan sees the whale meat is used in soups and dishes, so it is not being taken for research only, but also for food. Please if you would enlighten this gijing on your thoughts of this.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

bonedaddyDec. 24, 2013 - 05:44PM JST Hello, I'm in the United states and joined here just to ask a few questions of the Japanese people to help me >understand why Whaling is so important to you.. First off I would like to express my love your culture and pay my >respect to you.

There are few to no Japanese on these forums because Japanese people stick to the sites/forums in their own language. But as an American with extensive experience in Japan, as well as a gun owner myselff, let me answer your questions.

I would like to know why it is so important to continue with the killing of whales to you?

This is the same as when you are asked "why is owning guns so important to you"? Wouldn't you say that it is legal, you have the right and you harm no one? If being vilified and persecuted by anti-gunners, often with erroneous charges makes you irate then you can understand Japan's position on whaling. The Japanese Research whaling is LEGAL, conducted under the authorization of IWC Article VIII, and they submit their data to the IWC Scientific Committee as required. The same IWC Article VIII REQUIRES that the whale meat be consumed. They are takihg Minke Whales which are not endangered. They are conducting the research Whaling in INTERNATIONAL WATERS.They are being harassed by the ocean going version of PETA.

Do you not understand that there are so few left?

Do you understand that they are taking Minke Whales which are not only not endangered but ABUNDANT?

Why does that not make any difference to the Japanese people?

Because they are nor hunting endangered whales.They are complying with the IWC's regulations with the hope that commercial whaling can one day be resumed based on findings by the IWC Scientific committee.

These majestic creatures where here long before us, and hopefully they will be here long after we are gone, but not if >people don't help them out.

These "majestic creatures" are no more or less majestic than elephants, buffalo, rhinoceros or any other large mammal. For some counties like Japan, Norway, Iceland and even counties that don't whale openly like South Korea, whale is just another marine food resource.

Japan is a country with deep conviction and culture. I just don't understand the importance of whale meat to you. >Anyone that travels to Japan sees the whale meat is used in soups and dishes, so it is not being taken for research >only, but also for food. Please if you would enlighten this gijing on your thoughts of this.

The importance of whale meat to the Japanese is that they have a tradition several hundred years old of whaling and eating whale meat. Although it is nowhere near as prevalent as Americans eating beef, pork or chicken. I have to question your experience in Japan because you do NOT see whale meat in soups and dishes unless you go out of your way to find them in specialty places. IWC Article VIII which authorizes the research whaling REQUIRES that the meat from whales taken be consumed. This means "eaten". That the Japanese eat the whale meat, something they have done for hundreds of years does not provide evidence of anything.

Clearly you have been mislead by the anti-whaling crowd with false and misleading information. Everything I said can be verified by going to the IWC website itself and reading the "Scientific Permits" section. Just as I support gun ownership because it is right, I find that what Japan is doing is equally right. Only the International Court of Justice ruling expected next year will have any effect on my belief, not the wishful thinking and propaganda spewed by the anti-whalers.

Moderator: Gun ownership is, of course, irrelevant to this discussion.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Bonedaddy - Many Japanese themselves, in the street and in government are as perplexed by the Japanese governments persistence with the uneconomical, unscientific and now culturally extinct practice of whaling. Policy makers in the Fisheries department (I work with them) tell me it is simply stubborn pride of government leadership and of not wanting to back down and lose face. They also don't want to appear weak from foreigner pressure in the ocean, especially while China is watching during current high tensions.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

bonedaddyDec. 24, 2013 - 05:44PM JST

I would like to know why it is so important to continue with the killing of whales to you?

They are not killing whales for the sake of killing. Japan is conducting Research Whaling as authorized by IWC Article VIII in full compliance with it's terms including submittal of data to the IWC Scientific Committee. Japan's objective is to see the lifting of the Moratorium on Commercial Whaling based on IWC Scientific committee recommendations on population and sustainability figures.

Do you not understand that there are so few left?

Japan is taking Minke Whales which are not only not endangered but very abundant.

Why does that not make any difference to the Japanese people?

They do not take truly endangered species. So clearly it makes a difference.

These majestic creatures where here long before us, and hopefully they will be here long after we are gone, but not if >people don't help them out.

Whales are no more or less majestic than any other large mammals. And some cultures Japan, Norway, Iceland, etc use them as a natural marine resource. There is nothing "special" about them.

Japan is a country with deep conviction and culture. I just don't understand the importance of whale meat to you. >Anyone that travels to Japan sees the whale meat is used in soups and dishes, so it is not being taken for research >only, but also for food. Please if you would enlighten this gijing on your thoughts of this.

Firstly, you do not see whale meat in soups and dishes just by traveling to Japan. You pretty much have to locate specialty shops to try it. Secondly, the same IWC Article VIII that authorizes the Research Whaling REQUIRES that the whale meat be consumed, which means eaten. So even leaving aside the Japanese tradition of whaling and eating whale meat which goes back hundreds of years, they would have to eat it anyway to be in compliance with the IWC regulation. All this is available on the IWC website under Scientific Permits.

Japan's Research Whaling is being conducted in accordance with the IWC regulations, is LEGAL, being carried out in INTERNATIONAL WATERS, and the data is being used by the IWC Scientific Committee to determine whale populations and trends. They are also subject to acts of violence and eco-terrorism by SSCS, and an onslaught of propaganda and misinformation by those who disagree with what they are doing. Something I can identify with.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Well, they can't track the whalers by government ships as Japanese side can't send government navy to track SS. I think it doesn't worth to have an international incident.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

igloobuyerDec. 25, 2013 - 12:26AM JST

@OssanAmerica "the data is being used by the IWC Scientific Committee to determine whale populations and trends."

Do you in all honesty believe that?

Yes I do. Why? Because the Scientific Committee has never obstructed Japan's issuance of Scientific Permits by reason of "failure to submit data". The Committee has never rejected Japan's data as "fraudulent" or "invalid". "From 1987 to 2006, Japanese scientists presented 182 scientific documents to the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and had 91 papers published in peer-reviewed journals. The most recent review of JARPA by the IWC’s Scientific Committee in December 20062 made a number of recommendations for additional data analysis and concluded that “the dataset provides a valuable resource to allow investigation of some aspects of the role of whales within the marine ecosystem and that this has the potential to make important contribution to the Scientific Committee’s work in this regard as well as the work of other relevant bodies such as the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources”. The Scientific Committee also agreed to its earlier (1997) conclusion that the results from the research program “have the potential to improve management of minke whales in the Southern Hemisphere”.

If you read through the actual ICJ testimony you will see that the IWC Scientific Committee scientists by majority accept Japan's Research Whaling as "Research whaling". You can disagree all you want but until the ICJ produces a ruling I don't see anything that can substantiate your position.

For years Japan has been pressured to investigate whale pollutions though non-lethal means (like all other nations >do). Why does the media throughout the world point out that they are using a loophole in the convention and not >actually undergoing science.

A number of nonbinding resolutions have been passed by the anti-whaling faction within the IWC however the IWC Charter itself males clear that only the IWC Scientific Committee can make such changes. The Committee itself has expressed it's opinion that while some data can be obtained through non-lethal means, others can not. This contrats with the position of the anti-whaling faction that no lethal methods are required under any circumstance. The media repeats what the anti-whaling crows keep repeating; that Japan is using a "loophole" Actually hey are not using a loophole, they are using the IWC Article VIII to the word and complying with it. Again this is an question that hopefully the ICJ will answer next year.

When I ask anyone in the Japanese Ag and fisheries department if the "science" is real >and necessary, they just >smile and shake their heads.

Well they aren't on the board of IWC Scientific Committee scientists, are they?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Whether Japan's Research Whaling is right or wrong depends entirely on your point of view. If you believe that Whales a special animals that must not be killed under any circumstances then it is wrong. If you believe that Whales are a natural resource which should be managed in accordance with the IWC charter, then it is not wrong. Whether the Research Whaling is profitable or unprofitable is their problem, not anyone elses. Whether it is scientific or unscientific will be determined by the ICJ next year. Whether it is culturally extinct depends on where you are talking about. What is culturally extinct in one country or part of the globe does not necessarily have to be culturally extinct in another part of the globe. What is clear though is that in our modern world we don't exercise Cultural Imperialism, go to another country and force our point of view upon the inhabitants. Anti-Whaling advocates who argue that Japanese should not hunt or eat whales are guilty of just that. And rather hypocritically too since there are other places and peoples who hunt and eat whales.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

igloobuyer

I don't know about you, but I can't think of a more conclusive way to prove that commercial whaling is sustainable than to conduct successful lethal research whaling in enough of a volume that doesn't significantly affect the existing whale population. That the IWC hasn't convened their board (postponed for many years now) to consider and come to a conclusion on the viability of commercial whaling based on the research data that Japan's ICR has continued to submit over the years is not Japan's problem. The irrational notion that cetaceans are somehow in a special sentient category from the rest of the animal kingdom aside, it's no wonder that Sea Shepherd wants to stop the whalers because every year that Japan legally harvests whales under the IWC's charter is another year that goes to prove to the world in the most obvious way possible, that whale populations of certain species have recovered and that controlled commercial whaling has indeed become sustainable.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

@USNinJapan2

I don't know about you, but I can't think of a more conclusive way to prove that commercial whaling is sustainable than to conduct successful lethal research whaling..

Well then, like Japan's ICR you're not thinking hard enough and not aware of more effective modern research methods and technologies.

It’s better to collect feces than to kill whales. "Collecting their feces may not be the most pleasant job in the world, but analyzing the DNA found in great dollops of whale poop floating in the open sea can tell scientists — without cutting open its stomach — what animals a whale has been eating."

Meanwhile, DNA samples can be taken with relative ease from these mighty marine mammals by removing a small plug of skin from them. And a lot can be learned from their nasal mucus (snot).

Researchers can sample a whale’s breath — including its snot — by catching the gunk that spurts from its blowhole. (If you can’t imagine how you could possibly get close enough to a whale’s nose to do this, think creatively: Karina Acevedo-Whitehouse, of the Zoological Society of London, flies remote-controlled helicopters over breaching whales, catching flying snot on Petri dishes strapped to the sides of the choppers.)

From these samples, scientists can determine the viruses, fungi and bacteria that live in whales’ lungs.

Killing whales provides negligible data to science. Less than 1 percent of the papers published on cetacean biology come from studies that required the killing of a whale.

In fact, tagging live whales tells you far more. GPS tags allow biologists to track whales and learn migration routes as well as daily routines. And acoustic tags record marine noise, so we can get an aural picture of the undersea soundscape — and an idea of the amount of noise pollution from boats that whales are having to tolerate.

So despite what the legal experts — not biologists — may argue, Japan’s claims that it requires lethal whaling to conduct scientific research just do not stand up."

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/08/10/national/in-science-terms-japan-has-no-need-at-all-to-kill-whales/

0 ( +5 / -5 )

OssanAmerica USNINJapan,Igloobuyer. thank you guys for your responses. OssanAmerica I appreciate your corporate view of the whaling industry. Igloobuyer has a good and rational point, could this so called research be done in a non lethal way? Oh I forget it's not profitable that way is it. Without the meat, there's no money to do research. Minkes are not from what I gather the only whales to be targeted. If the whaling industry is on the side of the whales, than they can find other means of doing their so called research without killing whales.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

bonedaddyDec. 25, 2013 - 06:51PM JST OssanAmerica USNINJapan,Igloobuyer. thank you guys for your responses. OssanAmerica I appreciate your >corporate view of the whaling industry. Igloobuyer has a good and rational point, could this so called research be done >in a non lethal way? Oh I forget it's not profitable that way is it. Without the meat, there's no money to do research.

Your bias is rather clear but let me point out that there are no conservation measures with he exception of clearly endangered creatures, where lethal methods are not used, simply for the accuracy, facility and cost. Australia, which is leading the anti-whaling action, separately like many countries conducts fisheries research. To do so they trawl up a great amount of fish for studies. They also sell a portion of the catch to help finance part of their program, in other words the fish end up on dinner plates. Now, if we replaced "fish" one marine resource with "whales" another marine resource, how different would this be from Japan's Research Whaling program?

Additionally, the notion that all-non-lethal methods should be used, despite the loss of accuracy, cost, difficulty of implementation, in order to determine data which, according to the IWC charter, is suppose to allow the IWC Scientific committee to make recommendations which may LIFT THE MORATORIUM on commercial whaling, is, frankly, absurd.

Minkes are not from what I gather the only whales to be targeted. If the whaling industry is on the side of the whales, >than they can find other means of doing their so called research without killing whales.

The abundant Minkes are 99% of what are taken. Japan has always announced a number of humpbacks to be taken only to always announce immediately afterwards that humpbacks will NOT be taken. Seriously endangered species such as the Blue Whale are not even considered because the numbers could not support any taking even for research. Understand that Japan does not just go out and kill whales. Their Research Whaling program must be submitted in advance to the IWC Scientific Committee and is reviewed, and adjustments are made based on their recommendations. This includes species, numbers, age categories, etc. The IWC (International Whaling Commission) was created and exists to regulate THE WHALING INDUSTRY. It is NOT a Whale Preservation organization. The conservation measures that the IWC implements is for the benefit of the whaling industry, ie; ensure that global populations are sufficient to enable sustainable whaling. Basically, Japan is doing something that assists in the conservation measures of the IWC, In accordance and in compliance with the IWC regulations, in International Waters, and have a right to do. They are carrying on a tradition which is part of their culture, and doing so legally, sort of like some of us Americans. Yet they are bombarded by misinformation and vilified by a group driven not by science but by pure emotion. Sound familiar?

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Waste of Aussie tax payers' money. I don't think Australian Government should send any ship or plane to monitor Waling ship in International water.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

OssanAmerica,

Great points.

igloobuyer,

I didn't find the Japan Times writer especially convincing, despite his PhD.

For example, in one place he says, "Killing whales provides negligible data to science. Less than 1 percent of the papers published on cetacean biology come from studies that required the killing of a whale."

His factoid doesn't properly support his assertion. Assuming his 1 percent claim is true, that in itself does not prove that what Japan does is not science/research anyway. It just says that there is a lot of non-lethal research going on.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and this PhD obviously has his, but the ICJ is probably the best forum to hope for some non-biased judges to reflect on both sides of the argument, considering all the evidence.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

letsberealistic - How do you know there is a lot of non-lethal research going on?! Also, if there is only very limited lethal research going on don't you think that it's likely because it's ineffective!!

Are you suggesting that lethal or non-lethal research will be carried out by the Australian aerial Customs and Border Protection flights referred to in the article?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

How do you know there is a lot of non-lethal research going on?!

Because there are lots of papers published that use non-lethal data.

Also, if there is only very limited lethal research going on don't you think that it's likely because it's ineffective!!

Or maybe it is because lethal research is harder and more expensive, so it is only used when other methods won't suffice. Or maybe it is because the researchers don't see a reason to kill whales for data that can be obtained with non-lethal methods, so the only use the lethal methods when other methods won't suffice. Either way it clearly explains why lethal research is used when necessary and in all other cases non-lethal methods are used.

Oh I forget it's not profitable that way is it.

It still isn't profitable. They have relied on funding from the government since 1986 when the JAPRA program of research started.

how about you fire on the European nations and other whaling nations that actually say their doing it..". On what grounds did you come to the conclusion they are not?

The grounds that Sea Shepherds themselves publish information on their activities and none of their own claims include any direct action against European whaling in decades.

Looking forward to watching Whale Wars this season.

The latest season of Whale Wars was a single 2 hour show that has already by shown.

So despite what the legal experts — not biologists — may argue, Japan’s claims that it requires lethal whaling to conduct scientific research just do not stand up.

Well except the IWC Scientific Committee, a bunch of biologist that are experts on whales, agrees that some of the data that Japan collects can not be collected with non-lethal means.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites