Australia to tackle Japan on whaling at U.N. world court

Go Japan!

So how many people want to place a bet that this gets almost or no coverage in the mainstream media here OR is plastered all over, everywhere, with the banner headline of "Australia is attacking Japanese culture".

Which is it going to be?

Why, Iowan? Why "Go Japan!"? What interest do you have in Japan winning this case? Science? Law? Culture? If none of these then you might at least believe it better that animals that have done nothing to you should be left in peace to live. Or do you favour killing for the sake of it? There are many that seem to. Maybe they have a hatred of life. I just don't know.

Nothing to comment, at least intelligently until both sides present their case. That one side, Australia has done so is hardly news. And they even left out that it's more like Australia AND New Zealand against Japan because New Zealand joined the action afterwards "intervening" on behalf of Australia. Maybe they felt they needed a way out in case it flops?

"THE former prime minister Kevin Rudd launched legal action against Japan's whaling program despite opposition from senior ministers and officials who warned it was likely to fail and strengthen the hand of the Japanese. Leaked United States diplomatic cables also indicate that the decision to take Japan to the International Court of Justice was designed to divert public pressure on Labor over whaling. The Department of Foreign Affairs warned that the case against Japan's ''scientific'' whaling would ''either fail completely or, at best, set up the Japanese to simply make changes to their program to improve the science''.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/whale-watch/doomed-whaling-fight-aimed-at-saving-labor-vote-20110104-19f52.html

Nothing to comment, OssanAmerica?

Well, I am glad you did and quoted the Sydney Morning Herald saying "make changes to their program to improve the science". At least it indicates that the science as it stands is not up to best practice. That at least removes the we-are-doing-science justification for killing for the sake of killing and for the whaling budget. Thanks.

The environmental terrorist whalers slaughtered a record low number of whales this year - and I suspect even lower next season. The men and women of Sea-Shepherd are not going away regardless of the outcome in court.

Yes, it seems a PR disaster for a country so insecure and sensitive to what the world feels about it. But the budget for slaughter and bogus science is there.

But just to clear this up, Saulojpn, because it is a common misconception among Japanese too, but most GDP is not made on exports. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in Japan was worth 5867.15 billion US dollars in 2011. Exports were $788 billion (2011 est.). That is only 13%.

Ah, when Japan loses they'll just revert to the "You're attacking our culture!" 'fail-safe', snivel, then declare they're going to start commercial whaling regardless of international opinion and law. At least then they can stop pretending it's for science.

Ecoterrorist debate aside, I'm totally cheering for Australia on this.

MoonrakerApr. 12, 2013 - 08:13AM JST Nothing to comment, OssanAmerica? Well, I am glad you did and quoted the Sydney Morning Herald saying "make changes to their program to improve the >science". At least it indicates that the science as it stands is not up to best practice. That at least removes the we-are->doing-science justification for killing for the sake of killing and for the whaling budget. Thanks.

I guess you missed the part that says the odds of winning this case are not good.

SauloJpnApr. 12, 2013 - 08:27AM JST This issue is the most damaging for the public image and public opinion about JAPAN, internationally. Is it really worth >if? Can Japan really shut itself from the rest of the world?

MoonrakerApr. 12, 2013 - 08:42AM JST Yes, it seems a PR disaster for a country so insecure and sensitive to what the world feels about it. But the budget for >slaughter and bogus science is there.

You both really are overestimating how much of the "world" gives a hoot about whales.

Every country has their own public relations disaster, and yet, inexplicably, international relations seem to be no worse off than they have been in the past.

I mean, all of you anti-whalers know, that Japan doesn't hunt endangered whales, of course. You know that. For you, this is more about sensibilities than principles, isn't it? This is all about emotions and perceptions, rather than reality.

My, how confused Australia is!

Japan has no obligation to preserve marine mammals, as Australia is claiming. The whaling convention of course could not imply such an obligation, for it is not possible to preserve whales, and have whaling.

Clearly Australia has misunderstood the meaning of the whaling convention.

How can Japan lose, when Australia claims such a wild thing?

It also wants the ICJ to get guarantees from Tokyo that it will not undertake any further research until it conformed “to its obligations under international law”.

Australia says it is not research on one hand, and on another hand demands that Tokyo not undertake further research... It is another big contradiction.

How can Japan lose, when Australia makes such contradictory claim?

Australia’s lawyers will argue its case on the opening day, followed a week later by Japan, on July 2.

I suppose Australia's lawyers will not need much time. The less they talk, the less they will embarrass Australia.

Japan last week announced its whaling mission in the Southern Ocean was a “record low” this year, blaming “unforgivable sabotage” by activists.

ICJ should also take note that Australia harbors these activists, which have ruined Japan's research efforts in recent years.

About time to have it settled. The problem is, will Australia uphold the rulings?

Yubaru,

So how many people want to place a bet that this gets almost or no coverage in the mainstream media here OR is plastered all over, everywhere, with the banner headline of "Australia is attacking Japanese culture".

I am sure it will be covered in Japan. Although Australia and New Zealand have judges from their countries on ICJ panel, still, such esteemed panel of judges could never seriously accept outrageous claims made by Australia. Whaling law is quite clear. So long as Japan has lawyers, it should win, and of course media will note it.

We knew it from the start.

Australians will be shocked, though. Will they respect the law, or will they continue to harbor Sea Shepherd? This is the ultimate question.

Moonraker,

Well, I am glad you did and quoted the Sydney Morning Herald saying "make changes to their program to improve the science". At least it indicates that the science as it stands is not up to best practice.

All science can always be improved.

But thank you for accepting that Japan is conducting scientific research, not commercial whaling, as Australia claims.

I guess you missed the part that says the odds of winning this case are not good.

Nope, OssanAmerica, I didn't. What I was saying, based on your kind search for the evidence, is that until now the science has not been good. Yet, that has been one of the prime excuses.

But, perhaps because you don't yourself "give a hoot" about whales it does not mean there are not at least as many people who care about them (and life on this planet) as people who wanna slaughter them, discounting all those who just wanna see Japan slaughter them to upset environmentalists, and probably many more.

Actually, in some moments, though, I actually believe too that humanity on the whole could not care less whether this planet is reduced to bare rock. Some seem to be actively encouraging it.

But thank you for accepting that Japan is conducting scientific research, not commercial whaling, as Australia claims.

Yes, it claims science as the justification, indeed. I never claimed otherwise. Whether that is the truth or not is dubious.

Yes, science can be improved, especially when deliberately adulterated in the first place.

Hey Japan, scientific research or culinary tradition? You mean you've been lying to us all these years? Gee... we didn't guess.

Tokyo defends the practice, saying eating whale is part of the country’s culinary tradition

ihope2eatwhales

"International Court cannot make judgement based on matter of principle, but matter of law. Australia can not win this case"

You are jumping the gun here. Unless you have read the evidence to be presented by Australia to the ICJ which I believe you have not, this comment you have made that Australia cannot win the case is too early to make.

i just don't get it. why do some people get all worked up over animals? logically, it's pointless since most, if not all, species will become extinct anyways. so "let them eat whale" i say

****it is simply wrong

http://i46.tinypic.com/21r43o.jpg

Here some information on the Antarctic Treaty, which I assume Japan is still a signatory to. What obligations does Japan have under the terms of this agreement?

scientific research to be freely shared? no military weapons? all activities in Antarctica to be assessed for their environmental impact? marine pollution and disturbance of wildlife? the living resources are protected?

Seems like the Japanese are acting completely against the interests of all member states. Added to that, they move into water around pristine, world heritage listed islands which are without a doubt part of Australia? Japan is like a stubborn mule with little regard for anybody else in this situation. Japan can whale all it likes around Japan, but please leave the Southern Ocean.

@Mike Gauthier, in other words it's an emotional not a rational issue for you.

@AkashiAussie, because Australians and NZers feel they own the Southern Ocean? Try again.

marcelitoApr. 12, 2013 - 09:10AM JST Well, since the donations to SS and other environmental groups keep coming from all over the world as opposed to >the whalers getting funding exclusively through their amakudari J government connections -much more of the "world " >seems to give a hoot about protecting the whales and marine environment in general than about the value of >Japan`s "scientific research".

You really think the "contributions" are still coming in from all over the world? After Watson became an international fugitive, a US Court labeled Sea Shepherd "Pirates" and SSCS themselves foolishly gave their lawyers all their money to waste on frivolous counter-suits that get dismissed? If those "contributions" are coming in why are Sea Shepherd looking for a PR Firm to work for them for FREE??

What Japan is doing is within the law.

I hope the court throws out the case and fines Australia for wasting their time.

Of course, whoever loses will accuse the other of bribing the judges and this whole thing will just continue.

MoonrakerApr. 12, 2013 - 09:19AM JST "I guess you missed the part that says the odds of winning this case are not good." Nope, OssanAmerica, I didn't. What I was saying, based on your kind search for the evidence, is that until now the >science has not been good. Yet, that has been one of the prime excuses.

So? As has been pointed out, all science can be improved. What exactly is your point?

But, perhaps because you don't yourself "give a hoot" about whales it does not mean there are not at least as many >people who care about them (and life on this planet) as people who wanna slaughter them, discounting all those who >just wanna see Japan slaughter them to upset environmentalists, and probably many more.

No it's not just me, the vast majority of people on this planet don't give a hoot about whales one way or the other. And among those who do give a hoot, they don't care as long as the species being hunted aren't he endangered ones. And nobody wants to see Japan, Norway or Iceland or anyone else kill whales or any other animals JUST FOR THE SAKE of upsetting environmentalists. What a seriously inane concept.

Actually, in some moments, though, I actually believe too that humanity on the whole could not care less whether this >planet is reduced to bare rock. Some seem to be actively encouraging it.

Got news for you. Hunting non-endangered whales isn't going to reduce the planet to bare rock no matter how hard one tries. Actually even killing off endangered ones won't do that. You know what reduces the planet to bare rock? Nuclear war. Natural disasters. Asteroid collision. Earth falling off it's axis. None of which involve whales. Further news for you- Star Trek IV was just a movie.

cl400Apr. 12, 2013 - 09:25AM JST Hey Japan, scientific research or culinary tradition? You mean you've been lying to us all these years? Gee... we >didn't guess.

hey cl400. The IWC stands for the International Whaling Commission, created and existing to regulate the WHALING INDUSTRY. All conservation measures it implements are for the purpose of maintain whale stocks for THE PURPOSE OF WHALING. The Scientific Permits that IWC allows to be issued to conduct Research Whaling is for the purposes of determining if whale stocks have increased to the extent that the moratorium can be lifted. So that whales canm be commercially hunted and EATEN. IWC ARtcle VIII which authorizes Research Whalling REQUIRES that the meat be utilized...ie; eaten. So from the whales' point of view who cares if their eaten or killed and thrown away?

RedcliffApr. 12, 2013 - 10:10AM JST ihope2eatwhales "International Court cannot make judgement based on matter of principle, but matter of law. Australia can not win this case" You are jumping the gun here. Unless you have read the evidence to be presented by Australia to the ICJ which I >believe you have not, this comment you have made that Australia cannot win the case is too early to make.

And unless you have read Japan's Answer to Australia's complaint, which has not even been filed yet, one can not say that Japan cannot win either. I have already read the Australian complaint and the New Zealand Intervention. I am awaiting to read Japan's response before commenting on the outcome.

sorupuss

I guess Japan own the Southern Ocean. Japan own the South China Sea. Japan own the Antarctica. Japan own all of the Whales of Pacific Ocean. It is an imperialist mentality of pre war military adventure. Au and Nz can not be intimidated and threatened in their backyard.

When the whales are no longer exist, they will eat dolphins. Japan is the land of setting Sun. It should not behave like the land of rising Sun.

AkashiAussieApr. 12, 2013 - 10:35AM JST http://i46.tinypic.com/21r43o.jpg

Are the Japanese conducting research whaling in Australian territorial waters? No. Are they conducting research whaling within the Australian EEZ? No. Are they conducting research in International Waters to which Australia has made a claim? Yes. Does Australia have any jurisdiction over those waters whatsoever? No. G'day mate.

OssanAmerica - You have totally missed the point! The point is, Japan is conducting commercial whaling under a loophole in the IWC charter and calling it research. Yet, they defend it by stating they have a whaling culture. If Japan goes into the international court and uses 'culture' as their defense they will be on the first plane back to Japan with their head between their legs. Unlike Americans, the Australian gov is not making this a personal issue, but a global one. I live to see the day the Nisshin Maru is turned into Coke cans.

Japan's response can be very simple. Whaling convention states that signatory may grant permit for hunting of whales for scientific purposes, as it sees fit. Not as Australia or New Zealand or ICJ sees fit. As the signatory (Japan) sees fit.

Existence of ICR shows that scientific research is conducted, even IWC Scientific Committee itself often uses data provided by Japan.

Australia may argue anything, but such plain fact can not be made to vanish. This is why Japan cannot lose to Australia.

Octagon,

Southern Ocean is international waters, and whaling there is done by international convention for regulation of whaling. Japan does not own the Southern Ocean, and does not need to, in order to catch whales there.

Ossan

You both really are overestimating how much of the "world" gives a hoot about whales.

I agree with this although I detest the Japanese sham down there and your defense of their arrogant attitude. But sadly you are correct on this point.

DisillusionedApr. 12, 2013 - 11:30AM JST OssanAmerica - You have totally missed the point! The point is, Japan is conducting commercial whaling under a >loophole in the IWC charter and calling it research.

I'm afraid it is you who has missed the point completely. The issuance of Scientific Permits under IWC Article VIII IS NOT A LOOPHOLE. It is something that any IWC member is allowed to do.

Yet, they defend it by stating they have a whaling culture. If Japan goes into the international court and uses 'culture' >as their defense they will be on the first plane back to Japan with their head between their legs.

Well that isn't going to happen. You know why? Because I've read the Australian complaint as well as the New Zealand Intrervention and neither touches on the issue of culture. Hence, Japan will have no reason to touch on it in their response. Who is going to head back home with their tails between their legs can not be determined at this stage but the article I quorted from the Australuan suggests that it will be Australia.

Unlike Americans, the Australian gov is not making this a personal issue, but a global one. I live to see the day the >Nisshin Maru is turned I>nto Coke cans.

Americans are not making this a personal issue, The US advised Australia not to proceed with this case because the odds of winning were poor, Read the article I quoted to see why Australia did anyway, This is not a global issue, as much as Australia would like it to be. Sorry but the United States doesn't recognize your claim to the Antarctic territory, Australia has zero jurisdiction so they haven't had the cojones to try and kick the Japanese whaling fleet out. Because Australians seem to think they own this territory it is they who are making it a personal issue. The Nisshin Maru is made of steel and Coke cans are made of aluminum so I don't think you'll ever see your dream come true in any case,

spudmanreincarnatedApr. 12, 2013 - 11:48AM JST ">Ossan You both really are overestimating how much of the "world" gives a hoot about whales."

I agree with this although I detest the Japanese sham down there and your defense of their arrogant attitude. But >sadly you are correct on this point.

I am not defending anyone's attitude, I am defending what is right under the law and under the IWC regulations, I find Australia's attitude equally if not even more arrogant than Japan's.

spudmanreincarnatedApr. 12, 2013 - 11:48AM JST Ossan "You both really are overestimating how much of the "world" gives a hoot about whales."

I agree with this although I detest the Japanese sham down there and your defense of their arrogant attitude. But >sadly you are correct on this point.

Make no mistake, I am not defending anyone's "attitude". In fact I consider Australia's attitude equal to in not even more arrogant than Japan's.

Is Australias issue that the Japanese are whaling, or that they are doing it in the Southern Ocean?

Would Australia be as upset about this for example if the Japanese were collecting the same number of whales in their own waters?

I am confused as to whether Australias issue is whaling full stop, or the whaling within the marine sanctuary.

Japan can claim cultural tradition if they do it off their own coast, but they can hardly claim it if they travel thousands of miles south. In that regard, I think they need to be stopped. But if they insist on continuing to harpoon contaminated whales no one wants to eat within their own waters - fine, let them.

And nobody wants to see Japan, Norway or Iceland or anyone else kill whales or any other animals JUST FOR THE SAKE of upsetting environmentalists. What a seriously inane concept.

Then why do you want them to kill whales then? It is not clear.

I mean, I can understand those who have compassion for living things and the living planet but not those who do not. What motivates people with no personal interest in whales (who don't give a hoot) or whaling to back the slaughter? Perhaps you can enlighten me.

Is the fact merely that something may not be endangered reason enough to kill it?

Ossan: "The issuance of Scientific Permits under IWC Article VIII IS NOT A LOOPHOLE. "

They most certainly ARE exploiting a loophole, and you simply cannot admit it. They are doing it for COMMERCIAL WHALING, not science -- but if they say it's science, they can do commercial whaling under that guise. Hence, the loophole.

Disillusioned is bang on: No one but the Japanese and a few of the philes on here and elsewhere can keep a straight face when they claim it's for for science then defend the science by stating whaling is part of their culture. I do indeed hope they go to court stating "You're attacking our culture" etc., and watch it get thrown out. Of course, Japan will play the victim card as usual, but it'll be better for the world.

Make no mistake, I am not defending anyone's "attitude". In fact I consider Australia's attitude equal to in not even more arrogant than Japan's.

Point taken, this issue is more about pride and emotion than science and economics. Lucky for JT those emotions spur this discourse.

I eat whatever i want!!! U mad Australia ?

The case has been going on for about 3 years and waht is the news? http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=1&code=aj&case=148&k=64

Japan will win the case. The question is whether Japan violated IWC convention. There has never been any resolution by IWC that Japan violated its rules. In the absence of such recognition on the side of IWC, ICJ will not be able to judge that Japan is in violation. In addition, there is a history that the scientific committee of IWC repeatedly welcomed research whaling by Japan.

With the ICJ judgment on its side, Japan shall finally nail those eco terrorists like SS. Japan will thank Australia for giving it the opportunity to win over Australia.

ChibaChick,

I am confused as to whether Australias issue is whaling full stop, or the whaling within the marine sanctuary.

Australia has not supported Japan's rights to catch whales even in Japan's own waters.

Japan can claim cultural tradition if they do it off their own coast, but they can hardly claim it if they travel thousands of miles south. In that regard, I think they need to be stopped.

It is whale eating culture that drives Japanese people to wish to catch whales, however the issue of catching whales in Southern Ocean in particular is governed by the international law. International law does not deny Japan or any nation it's right to catch whales in international waters.

So I don't know why you think Japanese need to be stopped.

Moonraker,

I mean, I can understand those who have compassion for living things and the living planet but not those who do not. What motivates people with no personal interest in whales (who don't give a hoot) or whaling to back the slaughter? Perhaps you can enlighten me.

Anyone who respects diversity of culture and the international laws to prevent states from warring can accept catching some sustainable number of whales, using modern technologies, in international waters.

Is the fact merely that something may not be endangered reason enough to kill it?

No, whale eaters wish to eat them, for same reason as anti-whalers kill animals also. We do not wish to eat those which are endangered, of course. Scientific research is required to determine appropriate number that is sustainable. If you can not understand it, please do not be shocked when Australia loses ICJ case.

smithinjapan,

They most certainly ARE exploiting a loophole, and you simply cannot admit it. They are doing it for COMMERCIAL WHALING, not science -- but if they say it's science, they can do commercial whaling under that guise. Hence, the loophole.

It isn't commercial whaling. Commercial whaling would catch at least 2,000 minke whales. Maybe 5,000. Less than 1,000 each year is certainly for scientific purpose. IWC itself uses Japan's collected data.

Whether you think this is the "guise" or not, law allows such behavior. ICJ will show so.

Then, I hope you will learn it carefully.

You don't need to kill a hundred whales for scientific research. It's Japan's hogwash excuse and always has been. Nobody buys it expect die-hard japanophile manga freaks.

But I have a compromise. If Japan insists it is their 'culture' then let them restrict whaling to their own waters. After all anything they have to import from Antarctica can hardly be a traditional food. Ban whaling in international waters and let Japan catch whatever they can close to home. Tough luck if they run out in two seasons.

ihope2eatwhales - Japan's so-called 'research' is solely based on proving commercial whale hunting is viable. History proved it is not viable. Therefor, Japan can forget about the IC granting them permission to hunt whales commercially. Japan seems to think they are the only country in the world. Whales were hunted to near extinction by many countries in the last 200 years or so. Since the ban on commercial whaling whale populations have increased to around 20-30% of their populations 200 years ago. Japan does not have the sole right to plunder this resource. If everybody can't fish whales, nobody can! That will be the ruling of the international court.

Personally, as an Australian, I do not support Japan's whaling in its current form. I 'might' be able to accept it if it was done for cultural reasons, as it is in some indigenous cultures.

Not sure if I can speak for the rest of my countrymen on this forum but I think the point that people in Australia want to make to the Japanese is that whaling in the Southern Ocean (of which we do not claim as our own by the way) is not acceptable. We are definitely not anti-Japanese, just anti-whaling and keen on conservation.

*"marcelito Apr. 12, 2013 - 01:59PM JST

You say "whale eaters wish to eat them" and that culture drives Japanese people to wish to catch whales ... Well, those "whale eaters" sure seem to be seriously declining in numbers as tons of the unsold whale meat continue sitting in warehouses year after year." *

This is true too. The oyajis in the government and the industry are stubbornly trying to keep an unsustainable business afloat. vested interests are profiting from whaling even as the industry runs at a loss. They use their control of the media and political discourse to convince the population as a whole to go along with it in the name of 'culture'.

I just hope the whaling stops. As for the whole ICJ thing, I think It'll be months before we get any progress at all.

It is a domestic political issue as far as Australia is concerned and nothing more, the current labour party are in a minority government and therefore controlled by the Greens. Australia itself whaled commercially until the 70's and gave up for the simple reason that a synthetic alternative was found to the oil they needed, yes that's right they didn't whale for food. Although I don't want to eat whale, I don't think that Japan or any of the other Countries that still whale should be stopped if it is sustainable whaling.

it is not possible to preserve whales, and have whaling

Japan and Australia both want whale preserves. It's just that Japan wants them to be spreadable.

Takumi, eat what you like Just make sure you are not hunting in an international marine sanctuary.

budgie,

You don't need to kill a hundred whales for scientific research. It's Japan's hogwash excuse and always has been. Nobody buys it expect die-hard japanophile manga freaks.

IWC scientists themselves use Japan's data.

Who is correct. IWC scientists, or budgie?

Disillusioned,

Japan's so-called 'research' is solely based on proving commercial whale hunting is viable.

Exactly. It's not illegal, it's what the whaling convention is for.

History proved it is not viable.

Where is such proof? Iceland is currently doing good trade with Japan, based on their commercial whaling.

Therefor, Japan can forget about the IC granting them permission to hunt whales commercially.

It is quite magnificent logic.

However, I think you are greatly mistaken.

If everybody can't fish whales, nobody can! That will be the ruling of the international court.

You can not be serious.

AustPaul,

whaling in the Southern Ocean (of which we do not claim as our own by the way) is not acceptable.

Yes it is acceptable. International law says so.

Who is correct. IWC scientists, or budgie?

budgie.

marcelito, budgie,

No one would store whale meat from Iceland in Japanese warehouses in if there was no market for this product.

Again, who is correct? People who run Japanese warehouses, or marcelito and budgie?

the government and the industry are stubbornly trying to keep an unsustainable business afloat.

It is not unsustainable, although anti-whalers are seeking to make it so. If anti-whalers would cease to interfere, of course it could be the sustainable business, like Iceland's business of exporting whale meat to Japan.

the industry runs at a loss

Research whaling is not commercial whaling, it is not intended to make profit. If it would make a profit, of course then it would be the commercial whaling, and you would complain, anyway. Either way, anti-whalers always find something to complain.

They use their control of the media and political discourse to convince the population as a whole to go along with it in the name of 'culture'.

It sounds like anti-whaling NGO behavior in Australia.

I really hope Australia don't drop the ball on this and we can get some sort of ruling from the ICJ and send a clear signal that whaling is wrong.

Thunderbird2,

That's just it... Whales aren't the same as other wild animals. Tests have proved that they are self aware and highly intelligent.

Oh really. I thought whale was just slab of meat floating in the ocean.

I really hope Australia don't drop the ball on this and we can get some sort of ruling from the ICJ and send a clear signal that whaling is wrong.

Your culture and the law do not necessarily match. This will be the lesson of the ICJ ruling for anti-whalers.

If the meat is stockpiled in freezers that means it has gone unsold. That's the whole point of the BBC story some months ago. They can't sell it all. Yet someone must be profiting - probably from government subsidies.

And while the IWC may find some token data useful I doubt it too a hundred dead whales to produce.

Thunderbird2

That's just it... Whales aren't the same as other wild animals. Tests have proved that they are self aware and highly intelligent. Killing whales is as abohorrent as killing the great apes and elephants, also intelligent self aware animals.

I do not know which country you are from, but does your country have a law that prohibits killing of "self aware and highly intelligent" animals? If not, why not? If your country does not have such a law, why do you think you can persuade people in other countries to obey such a rule?

Oh really. I thought whale was just slab of meat floating in the ocean.

True colours. Can't argue with that mentality.

budgie, the meat isn't merely stockpiled, the pile is growing year on year.

http://www.jfa.maff.go.jp/j/study/enyou/pdf/shiryo2_4.pdf

The graph on P7 shows that in 2000 there was a total of 1,922 tons in the deep freeze, by 2009 it had grown to 4,246 tons. They can't give the stuff away.

ihope2eatwhales: "Oh really. I thought whale was just slab of meat floating in the ocean."

Japanese science 101 -- and that's as far as it goes in the case of whaling.

cleo: "The graph on P7 shows that in 2000 there was a total of 1,922 tons in the deep freeze, by 2009 it had grown to 4,246 tons. They can't give the stuff away."

But they can force it on children in school lunches.

budgie,

Existence of whale meat inventory is proof of demand for whale meat, actually. Iceland's whaling business would not export whale meat to Japan if they would only bear costs of storing meat in warehouse.

They can't sell it all.

It is backwards. They can't sell whale if they have no inventory at all.

And while the IWC may find some token data useful I doubt it too a hundred dead whales to produce.

You have many doubts, and I am sure you will have many surprises in your life as well.

AustPaul, I agree. Australia is mainly against whaling in the southern oceans. No one has seriously challenged Japan's annual hunt in the North Pacific, as this hunt takes place in waters nearer to Japan. Even anti-whalers leave this hunt to be, same as when Norway takes whales form waters near Norway. Pro-whalers like to forget this though, as they like to believe white people are discriminating against their culture, and use this lie for continuing to use tax money to support an unsustainable industry.

cleo, page 7 also would show increase in numbers of whales caught between those years, as Japan introduced wider scope research projects during the time. I suppose recent years size is decreasing, due to Sea Shepherd, although much meat is imported from Iceland.

I eat whatever i want!!! U mad Australia ?

This pretty much sums it all up. Dress it up any way you like, but this is the heart of the matter.

Anyone silly enough to think it has anything to do with science is, well, silly.

It is exasperating to see that some people still refuse to accept the fact that Japan’s whaling is not exploiting a loophole in IWC International Convention on Regulation of Whaling.

For the sake of an objective argument, please see http://iwc.int/cache/downloads/1r2jdhu5xtuswws0ocw04wgcw/convention.pdf Scroll down to page 2 and read Article VIII

Tokyo (with a population of about 13 million people) has quite a few restaurants which serve whale and down in Kyushu and up north in Tohoku people still cook and eat traditional whale dishes.

I do not know which country you are from, but does your country have a law that prohibits killing of "self aware and highly intelligent" animals? If not, why not? If your country does not have such a law, why do you think you can persuade people in other countries to obey such a rule?

I'm Scottish, I never said I was from Australia. O.o

As for a law... we have a law against cruelty to animals... ANY animals. Firing a harpoon at an animal counts as cruel and unnecessary suffering.

Oh really. I thought whale was just slab of meat floating in the ocean.

A predictable response.

JaneM: "It is exasperating to see that some people still refuse to accept the fact that Japan’s whaling is not exploiting a loophole in IWC International Convention on Regulation of Whaling."

More exasperating is the fact that some people seem to think their actual purpose is science and it is therefore not exploiting a loophole. Well, okay, it's not exasperating -- it's just laughable.

"Tokyo (with a population of about 13 million people) has quite a few restaurants which serve whale and down in Kyushu and up north in Tohoku people still cook and eat traditional whale dishes."

This is your defense of 'science' and your claim that Japan is not exploiting loopholes? Why am I not surprised?

ihope2eatwhales: "cleo, page 7 also would show increase in numbers of whales caught between those years, as Japan introduced wider scope research projects during the time."

Ah, so now it's not just "does it taste better with soy sauce or mayonnaise?" but they've added more condiments? Or do they just want to expand the menu in general?

Thunderbird2,

As for a law... we have a law against cruelty to animals... ANY animals.

OK, so you admit that your previous argument about "self aware and highly intelligent" is totally irrelevant. But if you now argue it is prohibited to kill "ANY animals", why is it OK to kill pigs and cows?

CH3CHO: "I do not know which country you are from..."

Is Thunderbird not allowed to have an objective opinion? What does it matter what country he or she is from? Would it still be valid as an attack on Japanese culture -- I mean science -- if he or she were Japanese and against the obvious exploitation of loopholes?

Less whale more ozy beef!

CH3CHO... you are using the old argument that anything in the sea is food, yes? Land animalss such as cows, pigs and other farm animals are bred for food. They are killed humanely (unless it's for a kosher/halal customer, but then I find that cruel)... if they are not treated properly the RSPCA/SSPCA and the government will deal with them. It's why we banned fox hunting with dogs, and why snares and bear-traps are banned.

Back to whales and they are NOT bred for food... they are a wild species, living free and minding their own business... probably wondering why the annoying bipeds from the land are killing them.

I stand by my assertion that whales should be protected the same as elephants and the great apes. They are not floating slabs of meat... I sometimes wonder if some JT members post certain comments just to get a reaction.

For me the problem is that the law is inadapted and should be revised .

It's a shame that this issue gets politicized , . In the 21st century and in the current ecological context ( with dozens of submarines species disappearing every few years and so many of them seriously threatened ) , common sense should prevail and whales should be better protected by the international regulations

At least the Inuit people use basically all of the animals they kill. I hate when animals are killed and left to rot.

This is great news! Go Austalia!

Ina0891, if your concern is extinction of certain species of whales, the current IWC framework is enough and there is no need for "better protection". It is agreed at IWC that sustainable catch limits shall be estimated and that IWC shall set quota to member countries based on the sustainable catch limits.

if he or she were Japanese and against the obvious exploitation of loopholes?

Let's put it this way. Japan was half-forced into that convention by America. When people are half-forced to do things, do not expect them to put it more than the bare minimum, and expect them to exploit any "loophole" they can.

Fukushima. Is that not reason enough for Japan to stop its massive money waisting Scientific research?

Japan's so-called 'research' is solely based on proving commercial whale hunting is viable. History proved it is not viable.

History may well have proved that unrestricted commercial whaling is not sustainable. But would a carefully limited commercial whaling effort succeed? That's the question, and for those who complain that Japan is using the science clause as a shield to conduct commercial whaling ... well, this would suggest at least a very limited whaling program is sustainable, wouldn't it?

Kazuaki, not really, since the scientific-cultural whaling program has cost well over 400 million dollars to the taxpayer since its inception in 1987. Industries that need to be over 90% tax funded cannot be considered sustainable. The one thing that has really been proven is that this industry cannot survive without huge injections of public money, mainly because the Antarctic hunts cost so much. A program that takes whales from nearer to Japan may be sustainable and there would be few objections, but that would leave Japanese oyajis with wounded pride, so this cannot be considered.

Why doesn't Japan continue its bogus research in waters nearer home to see if this is sustainable? That would make more sense than the annual hunts down under that have cost so many billions of yen and have cast Japan in such a bad light to the outside world. Plenty of non-Japanese don't feel we have the right to interfere with what Japan views as its food culture, but many of us do object to where Japan goes hunting, and we cringe at the Japanese "scientific research" nonsense. There is research, and research papers are produced, but the object is not research, which the entire world and his dog knows.

Shimazaki San

That's the question, and for those who complain that Japan is using the science clause as a shield to conduct commercial whaling ... well, this would suggest at least a very limited whaling program is sustainable, wouldn't it?

You might come from another planet. In the perfect world everything is sustainable because of limited whaling or scientific research. However many species of marine are more at risk than before due to the environmental damage. Another factor is rising temperature of sea and unlimited consumption.

I do not blame Aussie for their grave concern. They have natural wonder of Great Barrier Reef. Even it is questionable for how long it can survive from cruel reality.

MoonrakerApr. 12, 2013 - 12:20PM JST "And nobody wants to see Japan, Norway or Iceland or anyone else kill whales or any other animals JUST FOR THE SAKE of upsetting environmentalists. What a seriously inane concept."

Then why do you want them to kill whales then? It is not clear.

Nobody WANTS them to kill whales. You're putting words in my mouth just so you can argue against it.

I mean, I can understand those who have compassion for living things and the living planet but not those who do not. >What motivates people with no personal interest in whales (who don't give a hoot) or whaling to back the slaughter? >Perhaps you can enlighten me.

The vast majority of people don't give a hoot about all the animals we kill to eat. Same thing with whales, The only people who get bent out of shape are people who think that somehow "whales are special". To date there is no sound objective evidence to support that contention. Stop mixing "not caring one way or the other" with "backing killing".

Is the fact merely that something may not be endangered reason enough to kill it?

budgieApr. 12, 2013 - 01:53PM JST You don't need to kill a hundred whales for scientific research. It's Japan's hogwash excuse and always has been. >Nobody buys it expect die-hard japanophile manga freaks.

I have heard pro-whalers claim that anti-whalers are motivated by racism and anti-Japanese sentiment, Your statement above supports this claim. What does being a "Japanophile" have to do with whaling? There are tons of Japanese people not interested in eating whale. There are Japanese anti-whaling activists, What dies Manga have to do with whaling?

But I have a compromise. If Japan insists it is their 'culture' then let them restrict whaling to their own waters. After all >anything they have to import from Antarctica can hardly be a traditional food. Ban whaling in international waters and >let Japan catch whatever they can close to home. Tough luck if they run out in two seasons.

This is evidence of the fact that the true motive behind Australia's position is their claim to the Antarctic Territory. A claim that 99% of the world does not recognize, and over which Australia has ZERO jurisdiction. Hence, they have never been able to legally chase the whalers out of the area, a task they leave to the SSCS eco-terrorist organization whom they tacitly support. Because there is no legal grounds to kkep the whalers out based on territory, they have resorted to "Whaling" as the issue. My making research whaling illegal there, they can chase the whalers out, That the vast majority of Australians are "against whaling" but don't really care if Japan takes whales somewhere else is evidence of this fact,

AmericanhonorApr. 12, 2013 - 03:43PM JST Takumi, eat what you like Just make sure you are not hunting in an international marine sanctuary.

Go to the IWC site and read up on Scientific Permits and IWC Article VIII. The regulation exempts Research Whaling from recognizing Moratoriums and SANCTUARIES.

If Japan insists it is their 'culture' then let them restrict whaling to their own waters.

And of course do it in small wooden boats with hand-thrown harpoons like it was traditionally done.

Ah, OssanAmerica, so you don't want them to kill whales?

Yes, people who otherwise kill and eat animals may get bent out of shape when whales are killed, somewhat contradictorily, but that is a straw man. All the people who are arguing against killing whales may in fact be vegetarians. You actually have no idea.

But it seems to me that if you and Ihope2eatwhales are just concerned with the whole legality and international law in general then you might want to learn about international relations. It is a jungle out there. There is no one to enforce international laws as certain countries, America being one, know only full well. But perhaps environmentalists are an easier target on this small issue than the enormous crimes against humanity committed by powerful nation states. It would be harder to pick fights with them. They don't entertain sophistry and legal obfuscation when they do what they imagine is right. Environmentalists are at least prepared to engage you with debate, even if you don't agree.

Good luck to both of you but compassion for the earth and its life is what drives me. Perhaps you need to examine what really drives you.

And we circle back to the core of the issue - Japan's whaling is " scientific research " in name only which of course even the pro whalers know deep inside but will never admit to.

Wishful thinking. My impression of anti-whalers is that they failed in science so they are reduced to arguing based on emotion. It's clearly apparent that many have not even read the IWC scientific reports.

MoonrakerApr. 12, 2013 - 10:32PM JST Ah, OssanAmerica, so you don't want them to kill whales?

There you go again re-writing people's statements. I really don't care either way as long as they are not endangered species.

Yes, people who otherwise kill and eat animals may get bent out of shape when whales are killed, somewhat >contradictorily, but that is a straw man. All the people who are arguing against killing whales may in fact be >vegetarians. You actually have no idea.

No statistically that is highly improbable.

But it seems to me that if you and Ihope2eatwhales are just concerned with the whole legality and international law in >general then you might want to learn about international relations. It is a jungle out there. There is no one to enforce >international laws as certain countries, America being one, know only full well. But perhaps environmentalists are an >easier target on this small issue than the enormous crimes against humanity committed by powerful nation states. It >would be harder to pick fights with them. They don't entertain sophistry and legal obfuscation when they do what they >imagine is right. Environmentalists are at least prepared to engage you with debate, even if you don't agree.

Environmentalism, as with any belief set can be prone to extremism. There is a difference between being an environmentalist and supporting eco-terrorism. Just as there is a difference between developing land for human use and leveling enormous tracts with complete disregard for the environmental impact that it will cause. For humans to survive, advance and simultaneously preserve what should and can be preserved, it requires the ability to avoid extremism and be and to compromise. Hope you think about this.

marcelitoApr. 12, 2013 - 10:46PM JST " Go to the IWC site and read up on Scientific Permits and IWC Article VIII. The regulation exempts Research Whaling from recognizing Moratoriums and SANCTUARIES." And we circle back to the core of the issue - Japan's whaling is " scientific research " in name only which of course >even the pro whalers know deep inside but will never admit to.

You are repeating the same old anti-whaling fallacy. The IWC Scientific Committee to whom the Research Whaling data must be submitted has NEVER rejected as invalid or not in compliance with Article VIII requirements. The IWC itself has never called Japan's Research Whaling "NOT RESEARCH WHALING". This is exactly what Australia and New Zealand are attempting to prove at the ICJ, despite the rather poor odds of success. Anti-Whalers simply repeating this fallacy does not make it fact, it needs to be proven. That the meat itself is eaten is NOT PROOF because Article VIII REQUIRES that the meat be processed. Do you have any other evidence that the Research Whaling is "not" research whaling? Bet you don't.

Ah_soApr. 12, 2013 - 09:38PM JST "If Japan insists it is their 'culture' then let them restrict whaling to their own waters." And of course do it in small wooden boats with hand-thrown harpoons like it was traditionally done.

What is "traditional" is the eating of whale meat. Just like in Korea where it is even older. Not the means of taking the whales. The Inuits (Eskimos to you) hunt small whales today with motorboats with outboards and high powered scoped rifles. And they carry the whale meat on their snowmobiles to the supermarkets where it is sold. Yet nobody argues that they aren't carrying on a "tradition".

I used to support the Japanese whalers, and I still support their right to conduct whaling in their own territorial waters out of respect for their culture, but enough is enough and they should be sent packing from the Southern Ocean. I donated a lot of money to your earthquake appeal - money that I couldn't really afford to donate, and to see your government spend funds earmarked for reconstruction efforts in Tohoku on this whaling program makes me angry, especially while those up in Tohoku are still living in temporary accommodation. Your flip flopping from one excuse for whaling to another is equally as infuriating.

Japan is a very stubborn country, and despite a massive chip on your shoulder about what everyone else in the world thinks about you, you have no respect for the wishes of other nations. To make matters worse, the last time you were in the Southern Oceans in an area which Australians have worked hard in and lost lives in, to forge a pathway to Antarctica and create amazing opportunities for scientific research, you are bringing naval vessels, refueling vessels and are brutally slaughtering some of the most intelligent creatures that inhabit the area. Last time your whaling ships even entered territorial water around Macquarie Island, which is world heritage listed and without a doubt Australian territory. What sheer and utter disrespect for one of your closest allies. Stories related to our exploration in this region are key parts of our birth as a nation and the establishment of our national identity.

The reason the Australian government has not made any real attempts to force your ships out of our territory is not because they know they have no claim to the area　as you suggest OKun, it is out of respect for the good relations and friendship between our two nations. This is why we are taking the matter to court, rather than arresting your crew and confiscating your boats, as we do with South Americans who come to fish in these waters. I will be interested to see what the new prime minister of Australia does about this issue once the current red headed clown is voted out.

I have eaten whale and I will continue to support your cultural rights, but I hope your corruption fueled, yakuza linked commercial whaling industry in the Southern Ocean gets the treatment from the IWC that it deserves.

AkashiAussie

The entire "Southern Ocean" does not belong to Australia. Innocent Passage is allowed UNCLOS. ATS itself does not allow the claim granted by UNCLOS. Australia has already proved themselves that they cannot abide by the treaty in force. Start respecting them and then may be your country has a point.

One thing I have found exceedingly strange over the years is that neither Norway or Iceland, which actually harvest more whales than Japan does, do not receive a fraction of the attention, criticism, vitriol, hatred and condemnation that Japan does from the media, the public, and eco-terrorists over "whale hunting." In fact, unless you made a point of finding out you wouldn't even know that Japan is not the only country harvesting whales. Why is that, I wonder?

AkashiAussieApr. 12, 2013 - 11:50PM JST I used to support the Japanese whalers, and I still support their right to conduct whaling in their own territorial waters >out of respect for their culture, but enough is enough and they should be sent packing from the Southern Ocean.

Proof that you are interested not in saving whales, but in establishing Australian dominance over the Southern Ocean.

I donated a lot of money to your earthquake appeal - money that I couldn't really afford to donate, and to see your >government spend funds earmarked for reconstruction efforts in Tohoku on this whaling program makes me angry, >especially while those up in Tohoku are still living in temporary accommodation. Your flip flopping from one excuse for >whaling to another is equally as infuriating.

Foreign donations played no part in the money that went to whaling.

Japan is a very stubborn country,

No less stubborn than Australia for sure.

and despite a massive chip on your shoulder about what everyone else in the world >thinks about you, you have no >respect for the wishes of other nations. To make matters worse, the last time you were >in the Southern Oceans in an >area which Australians have worked hard in and lost lives in, to forge a pathway to >Antarctica and create amazing >opportunities for scientific research, you are bringing naval vessels, refueling vessels >

What "Naval vessel"? The unarmed icebreaker? Refueling vessel? Like the South Korean Tanker? ARe you confusing these for some kind of naval invasion?

Last time your whaling ships >even entered territorial water around Macquarie Island, which is world heritage listed >and without a doubt Australian territory. What sheer and utter disrespect for one of your closest allies. Stories related >to our exploration in this region >are key parts of our birth as a nation and the establishment of our national identity.

Really? Then why was the AMSA not deployed to chase the whalers out of there?

The reason the Australian government has not made any real attempts to force your ships out of our territory is not >because they know they have no claim to the area as you suggest OKun, it is out of respect for the good relations and >friendship between our two nations.

Bollocks mate. Australia does have a claim, albeit recognized by 4 countries in the world, and Australioa has taken no action because it has ZERO jurisdiction and knows it.

This is why we are taking the matter to court, rather than arresting your crew and confiscating your boats, as we do >with South Americans who come to fish in these waters. I will be interested to see what the new prime minister of >Australia does about this issue once the current red headed clown is voted out.

Wrong, the court action is to appease the domestic audience. Read: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/whale-watch/doomed-whaling-fight-aimed-at-saving-labor-vote-20110104-19f52.html

I have eaten whale and I will continue to support your cultural rights, but I hope your corruption fueled, yakuza linked >commercial whaling industry in the Southern Ocean gets the treatment from the IWC that it deserves.

Well mate, your "Okun" is cute but too bad I'm not Japanese and I don't live in Japan. So your continued use of "your" ,makes no sense. Don't feel too bad if the ICJ thing doesn't work out.

A Realist, the answer to your question is really very easy and shouldn't have caused you such confusion for so long, even if the answer is not awfully convenient to pro-whalers and people who insist on using terms like "eco-terrorist". It's the location, pure and simple. Like most, you seem not to know that Japan also conducts an annual North Pacific whale hunt. This hunt does not get condemned in the same way as the Antarctica mission, neither does it get the attention of Sea Shepherd. Ask yourself why. The answer is that this hunt takes place in North Pacific waters nearer Japan, not on the other side of the world in a whale sanctuary off the coast of Australia. Hunts by Norway and iceland are also in waters nearer home. Rocket science is not required to understand this difference and the traditional Japanese race card no longer works. I don't mind if Japanese people eat whale, just take it from waters nearer Japan, that Japan's own "research" insists are abundant with non-endangered species.

well i think its Funny & Stupid people always compare US to JP. the sea sheppard is a pain in the Butt. paul watson is from Canada & many are from every part of the world including Australia. WHY is there support for sea sheppard here? WHY is there thumbs down on the comment (GO Japan)? I thought this site was for people who Liked & Respected Japan. the Japanese people need to eat & for a self sustaining country its very Low so it has to use the Ocean as a resource for Food, I FULLY Support JAPAN on this!

Mr Ossam, your claims "no one else in the world gives a damn about whales", well if that was the case then why not has the global moritorium been overturned in the IWC, ESP when Japan bribes many nations to vote with them in the IWC. As for your comment Japan wants sanctuaries why then did Japan use it's voting block of bribed nations to block the Sth Atlantic sanctuary, far away from Japanese hunting grounds.

Then you continue on about how Japan only hunts non-endangered whales, have another look at the hunting quota issued by the ICR, you will find it includes 50 Humpbacks, & another 50 Fin whales, both species listed as CRITICALLY ENDANGERED. Then let's take a look at JARPN, all hunts contain both Sei whales, & borderline extinct Sperm whales, & in ALL recent JARPN hunts the ICR lists the numbers for slaughtering CRITICALLY ENDANGERED whales listed on the RED LIST by CITES.

& you claim Aus will DEFFINATELY LOOSE it's case against Japan in the ICJ, well all they have to show is Japan is not conducting "SCIENTIFIC REASERCH", but is in fact a "COMMERCIAL HUNT",in a designated sanctuary & is quite easily done by showing photos from a single trip by a customs vessel showing J-whalers hunting for single pods & massacring them, NOT infact taking animals from different pods, in different areas, much as a SCIENTIFIC survey would do, & how actual scientist would behave

Then you have ALL the breaches of the Mexico Treaty, never mind COMMERCIALLY HUNTING in a GLOBALLY accepted whale SANCTUARY...

& as for others comments regarding IWC setting quotas for commercial whaling, pls have a look at why the GLOBAL MORITORIUM was introduced; because INFACT THEY DID! Countries such as Japan then chose to violate those treaties & agreed quotas & whale numbers were still being decimated. A GLOBAL MONITORIUM was the only answer.

& to iwanttoeatwhales, it was agreed then the moratorium would not be lifted until whale stocks had returned to 90% of numbers to previous 100yrs, NOT that it would be lifted in 1990!

& as for Aus V Japan in the ICJ, the IWC has passed several motions requesting "Japan cease it's JARPA1 & JARPA2 programs, as they serve no scientific basis", & create conflict within the IWC...

A Realist, is Norway or Iceland hunting whales in an INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED SANCTUARY? oh but wait it's all about beef right? & if so why does Japan need to have over 6,000 Tons of whale meat stored in freezers that it cannot sell, but still spend tens of millions to go hunt in a sanctuary on the other hemisphere? Oh that's right because it is not actually about beef, is about J pride...

Japan hopefully will be forced by the court to say it's not for science but I don't see how they can stop Japan from whaling if it leaves various organizations.

and down in Kyushu and up north in Tohoku people still cook and eat traditional whale dishes.

I'll call BS on the Kyushu bit JaneM. VERY few people in Kyushu eat whale. At all.

Good luck to both of you but compassion for the earth and its life is what drives me. Perhaps you need to examine what really drives you.

Argument.

the Japanese people need to eat & for a self sustaining country its very Low so it has to use the Ocean as a resource for Food, I FULLY Support JAPAN on this!

Then perhaps the millions upon millions of yen wasted on this exercise would be better spent going to areas it was intended for (Fukushima?), and/or areas of necessity. If Japan needed to whale to garner sustenance, that would be one thing. But it's not even being consumed...

DJbooth your anti-whaling posts are all over the internet on every forum and news comment board that touches on the subject. What are you going to do with your life if Australia fails at the ICJ?

DJboothApr. 14, 2013 - 03:48AM JST

Mr Ossam, your claims "no one else in the world gives a damn about whales", well if that was the case then why not >has the global moritorium been overturned in the IWC, ESP when Japan bribes many nations to vote with them in the >IWC.

Because he anti-whaling faction in the IWC, which incidentally STARTED THE BRIBING OG VOTES PROCESS, has hindered any efforts to lift the Moratorium. It cannot be lifted without the Scientific Commitee's recommendation, and such recommendation cannot be made without research data. Why else are the anti-whaling nations so keen on stopping any research whaling as authorized by Article VIII?

As for your comment Japan wants sanctuaries why then did Japan use it's voting block of bribed nations to block the >Sth Atlantic sanctuary, far away from Japanese hunting grounds.

Never said that. Don't make stuff up just so you can argue against it.

Then you continue on about how Japan only hunts non-endangered whales,

Never used the term "only". Again, don't make up what people said.

& you claim Aus will DEFFINATELY LOOSE it's case against Japan in the ICJ,

Nope. I cited the Sydney Herald and provided a link. Try reading it. I repeatedly stated that the outcome can not be determined at this stage.

well all they have to show is Japan is not conducting "SCIENTIFIC REASERCH", but is in fact a "COMMERCIAL >HUNT",in a designated sanctuary & is quite easily done by showing photos from a single trip by a customs vessel >showing J-whalers hunting for single pods & massacring them, NOT infact taking animals from different pods, in >different areas, much as a SCIENTIFIC survey would do, & how actual scientist would behave

Nobody with half a brain considers this case on a levcel of "all they have to do". Have you even read the texts of the Ausytrakian complaint and the New Zealand Intervention? BTW, Japan has repeatedly requested Australia to send a Customs vessel and it is Australia that has continuously refused.

Then you have ALL the breaches of the Mexico Treaty, never mind COMMERCIALLY HUNTING in a GLOBALLY accepted whale SANCTUARY...

Go to the IWC site, look up Scientific Permits and you will see that Participating members ARE EXEMPT FROM RECOGNIZING IWC CONVENTIONS. To simplify that for you, those conventions are SANCTUARIES and MORATORIUMS.

DJboothApr. 14, 2013 - 04:11AM JST & as for Aus V Japan in the ICJ, the IWC has passed several motions requesting "Japan cease it's JARPA1 & >JARPA2 programs, as they serve no scientific basis", & create conflict within the IWC...

None of which is relevant as long as the IWC Scientific Committee does not reject Japan's submitted data as required, on the basis of validity or accuracy.

& may I add, I will also continue to keep doing all I can to protect them, & not for monetary reasons, but having personally interacted with them, & personally seen the joy of children, adults of all nations,(including Japanese), seeing the smiles on those peoples faces after interreacting with another species that has the ability to kill them but chooses not to, because of it's gentle compassionate nature. & also seeing whales enjoying the interaction, including mothers with new born calves "proudly showing them off", & allowing humans to interact with their baby, despite the decimation we have bought to their spieces, & Japan still does today, including mothers & their new born calves...

Sorryr Ossam, the "Global MORITORIUM" on whaling was agreed to be lifted once whale stocks reach above 90% of global stocks 100yrs previous, not when Japan bribes enough nations to join the IWC & vote with them!

The "Mexico Treaty" has nothing to do with the IWC, have a look, & check out all the violations of the treaty which Japan signed & agreed to, including NO vessel to vessel refueling below 60, NO dumping of refuse off vessels,(including human or animal waste, & 60% of the whale carcass is dumped).

You actually stated Japan as much as anyone wants "preserves", or in another word a sanctuary. Are you now saying Japan did not vote against the Sth American proposal to the IWC for a "Sth Atlantic Whale Samctuary", a proposition that may I add came from ALL SURROUNDING COUNTRIES, & BLOCKED by Japan using it's voting block of bribed nations to BLOCK the passing of in the committee?

As for the IWC scientific committee, they have stated JARPA1 & 2 are UNNECESSARY, & agreeded with the motions calling on Japan to cease them. Further more they have stated countries supplying data from NON-LETHAL research is supplying more valuable data, to which all countries surrounding Antarctica joined together to join forces in non-lethal research & asked Japan to join in, Japan refused as there would be no meat to send home...

& I must ask once again as you have stated;"Japan only hunts non-endangered species", are not Sperm Whales, Sei whales, Fin whales, & Humpback whales on the CITES "red list", which means CRITICALLY ENDANGERED, yet have a look through the ICR's quota's, & whales killed list & see for yourself by their own admissions of just how many critically endangered species they activly go out to hunt & slaughter. So please answer the question, why do you state "Japan ONLY hunts non-endangered species", when it is there for all to see Japan not only hunts, but purposely goes out to hunt CRITICALLY ENDANGERED species???

The less whales are close to Jwhaling vessels then the safer they are! & if that is your belief that ships,(& there is a difference between a ship & a boat), then how could you possibly support a fleet of ships heading to a whale sanctuary seeking out whales for close interaction with harpoons?!?!?

& whale watching from a small boat does not hurt them in any way. Meanwhile actively hunting them down & shooting an exploding harpoon in it's back, or stomach, or head does, it kills them. Am sure if you ask any biologist if chasing them down & shooting exploding harpoons into them, or going out on a small boat & viewing them from a safe distance, which would be the least harmful interaction? & more often than not whales actively choose to swim up to a boat & interact, we do not chase them, unlike Jwhalers, who travel to the other side of the globe to chase them!

& a ship strike is from a ship, a vessel bigger than them, whale whatching is done from boats, smaller than them, so in a collision in the whale whatching industry between a boat & a whale the boat would be the loser, never heard of it happening though.

& you state whale whatching is a horrendous business, yet you defend JARPA2 by stating some of the vessels are not there to harpoon them, but to simply whatch them, so therefor traveling to the otherside of the globe to go whale whatching? & in ships which will injure or kill a whale in a collision... Hmmm?

& FYI information Japan has only once requested an Aus gov vessel be sent, previously when Aus gov has sent a customs ship Japan gov protested it, so please stop trying to twist facts, & for that matter IF SS crew were infact breaking international law, & were infact terrorists & criminals as you have stated, then why were they not arrested when arriving at port, even though they were searched as Jgov request?

I love Japan a lot, and it is my favourite people and place, but the whaling is simply disgusting.

DJboothApr. 15, 2013 - 03:23AM JST & FYI information Japan has only once requested an Aus gov vessel be sent, previously when Aus gov has sent a >customs ship Japan gov protested it, so please stop trying to twist facts

"Despite repeated refusals by the Australian federal government, Japan continues to state that it would be open to Australia sending a customs or navy vessel to the Southern Ocean to monitor the annual whale hunt. "

http://japandailypress.com/japan-open-to-australia-observing-sea-shepherds-real-actions-during-whale-hunts-2725884

Which one of us is "twisting facts" as you say?

OssanAmerica and DJbooth, you have both posted more than enough on this thread. You are now bickering and going around in circles. Please do not address each other any further on this thread.

Saiaku

but the whaling is simply disgusting.

It is just childish to say in public, "I hate whaling and, therefore, everyone in the world should hate whaling."

DJbooth

the "Global MORITORIUM" on whaling was agreed to be lifted once whale stocks reach above 90% of global stocks 100yrs previous

Would you give us the link to that agreement? If such an international agreement really exists, it should be on the IWC website, but I could not find one and I have not heard such news before, either.

If you cannot do that, I am not going to take your comments seriously any more.

I have nothing against eating any animal however to rape the planet of various animals (in this case oceanic mammals) until extinction is sheer madness. I have Japanese acquaintances who have the "I will eat what I want" attitude. Yet they cannot justify why their nation is to stupid to figure out how to feed themselves in a way that doesn't require various species genocide? A third world nation ok I get it but a first world nation like Japan....grab a brain.

madmel

to rape the planet of various animals (in this case oceanic mammals) until extinction is sheer madness.

That is not the question here. The question is "should we prohibit whaling even if there are enough whales for sustainable whaling?"

The answer is that this hunt takes place in North Pacific waters nearer Japan, not on the other side of the world in a whale sanctuary off the coast of Australia.

By this logic, Australia should not be allowed to fish in international waters, and yet it does.

Why do the Japanese insist on killing these magnificent creatures?? It is purely for commercial gain, the Blue Whale, probably the largest living mammal on the planet, is far more intelligent that the Japanese whalers that carry out the mass butchering of this fabulous creature!, I was once on a world cruise, which visited Antarctica, and a distress came out from the **** Maru, a Japanese whaling ship. At the time l was in conversation with the Captain of our cruise ship, who did walkabouts everyday.....l immediately ask him NOT to answer the call....He said he was bound by International Law to answer it!! He asked about my objection, and l simply said, l would cause an incident, by trying to get onboard the Maru and maybe try and disarm, or certainly protest in my way at what they do to these wonderful creatures!!! A little while later, he came by and told me, that another ship, had answered the call, so we fortunately did not have to go...He was relieved!!! and asked me if l was sincere! ...the answer was in my face, damn right l would have reacted!!! If a stranded whale was needing help, the alternative being the Japanese Butcher, l know which one l would help!!

Finally, if this is Japanese culture, as been claimed in previous blogs, then what will they do when they have all been butchered to extinction???

Finally, what l cannot understand is if this is Japanese "culture" to murder and eat these creatures, what happens when they have become extinct????

If you consider that other countries that still engage in whaling (excluding Iceland and Norway) do so by allowing indigenouse peoples to use indigenous "technology" to hunt whales to feed themselves on a subsistence basis, a question I have is whether the difference is that Japan, Norway and Iceland use modern commercial methods to feed home constituents who are not living at a subsistence level.

What a load of bs Japan has a cultural problem if it has to eat whales. Australia used to eat whales when I was a kid we used to go to the whaling station in Albany and watch them get slaughtered. They have stopped eating them and Japan has to do the same as all the world has. When they have replenished themselves again u will be able to eat them. If you eat them all now what will ur children eat? Stop eating them.

Scottydog,

OK. You love whales and that is why everyone in the world should love whales, and stop killing them. Very childish isnt it?

Finally, if this is Japanese culture, as been claimed in previous blogs, then what will they do when they have all been butchered to extinction??? Finally, what l cannot understand is if this is Japanese "culture" to murder and eat these creatures, what happens when they have become extinct????

Japan is advocating sustainable whaling.

Robert Roo,

When they have replenished themselves again u will be able to eat them.

Good point. I think minke whales have replenished themselves enough for sustainable whaling.

Ch3cho: Japan is not advocating sustainable whaling at all. All the world has stopped hunting them for a reason. Only Japan has broken world moratorium on killing whales. It is not culture Australia used to eat them also. Culture is just an excuse. If it was culture then australia would be eating them too... And if there are enough whales or not u wouldn't know. The world body that said to stop killing and eating them is in charge and they say stop. And for scientific research hahahha then why is the meat sold in the supermarket? Excuses made by people who want to break international law.

I'm Australian and don't really care that Japan is whaling, but don't call it research because that's an insult to our intelligence. I agree that the Sea Shepard is a pirate ship. I think people love whales because they have a 2metre tongue and can breath through the top of their head!

Oh Robert...please at least attempt to research before making such a biased argument. The U.S, Norway, Russia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Indonesia, Iceland, Greenland, Canada and the Faroe islands all have whaling to a certain degree. Thus, this is not a "only Japan" thing nor is it a "all the world has stopped hunting them thing" It is a divisive topic, I agree but misguided arguments only serve to invalidate what you are arguing for.

Robert Roo, scientific research whaling as defined by IWC is whaling for estimating the population and age distribution of whale stock. It is not a zoological research, but scientific research for whaling. For example, read this. http://iwc.int/sorp The "scientific research" is nothing but reseach of abundance of whales for whaling.

why is the meat sold in the supermarket?

Read paragraph 2 of article 8 of IWC convention. http://iwc.int/cache/downloads/1r2jdhu5xtuswws0ocw04wgcw/convention.pdf

Paragraph 2 'Any whales taken under these special permits shall so far as practicable be processed and the proceeds shall be dealt with in accordance with directions issued by the Government by which the permit was granted.' is just the reason why the government has made its own way to subvert conservation by means of 'scientific' research. Since when would u have to kill something over and over and over to make research for something u r trying to tell me you want to conserve. Hahaha don't even need to reply as it is just a loop hole that has been exploited for your own gain. Research tagging and counting whales doesn't entail killing and eating them. And Tokyio other countries that are hunting and eating whales are mostly indigenous people's that have done so for centuries and don't take anywhere near the commercial quantity that Japan is taking. Research yourself and open your eyes and ears before commenting nonsence to promote your biased opinion. After there are no whales what will u do then? Hunt gaijins?

Robert, I belive what you said was, and I quote "All the world has stopped hunting them for a reason. Only Japan has broken world moratorium on killing whales."

That is simply not true. I was merely pointing that out to you.

Robert Roo

Since when would u have to kill something over and over and over to make research for something u r trying to tell me you want to conserve.

You have to kill a whale and examine the body to know its age.

The whale lovers should face the fact that there are enough whales for sustainable whaling. Norway takes about 600 minke whales every year out of 80,000 population in North Atlantic, and they are just doing fine. What is the sustainable limit out of 500,000 minke whales?

CH3CHO: "You have to kill a whale and examine the body to know its age."

Of COURSE you do! It's called the absolute moron's approach to science. Japan's approach to science varies from soy sauce to mayonnaise.

Of COURSE you do! It's called the absolute moron's approach to science. Japan's approach to science varies from soy sauce to mayonnaise.

So how does one determine of the age of whales?

Other arguements are not worth replying to as just some countries false pride. Oh I forgot its not breaking the monitorium as its science to determine there age hahhahaha that's better than the clip above....

Chalk one up for another anti-whaler who thinks estimation of marine resources that number hundred of thousands to millions are physically counted with a counter in his/her right hand.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr2cWHJt0Go www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fM0XxRLNI Quite nice information and also amazing pictures right there with a whale. Lucky the diver wasn't Japanese with a set of chopsticks......

Whales Japan eats are full of mercury and environmental toxins but endangered they are not. Go eat your kangaroo and be a good little Australian.

Nigel ha like all the extinct or Near to extinct species in Africa u r talking about? Monatorium is not put by u or me so u like the bar really wouldn't know now would u

Japan should be punished badly before international court, for their irresponsible attitude.

"Research" is a black lie.

Just my two Yen... Whaling was not a commercial venture until the Sino-Japanese war when resources became short. The idea that whaling is culturally important is invalid. Some villages did hunt whale LOCALLY. I live in Okinawa and Nago is known to hunt whale and dolphin... IN SABANI not diesel powered vessels with processing capabilities. If you Japan wants a cultural hunt I am sure very few people in the international community would object. Get out there in traditional wooden vessels native to your part of Japan, row or sail your vessel in pursuit of the target, harpoon, snag, or net your prey and then haul it in by hand, and do it all in your own damn territorial waters.

acidcrash

If you Japan wants a cultural hunt

No. Japan wants resumption of commercial whaling and repeatedly proposed the resumption at IWC. To restart the commercial whaling, IWC must set catch limits. To set catch limits, IWC needs to know the population and age distribution of whales. The research whaling by Japan is required for estimation of the population and age distribution of whales. Japan wants to restart commercial whaling because consumption of whales is Japanese culture.

It is very simple and makes perfect sense.

Acid crash hit the nail on the head - exactly right. Of course u won't get any credit for it here as this is Japan times site and so of course the % s are against you but it's still important to express logic. Ch3cho said it ' Japan wants' want being the word, want is not law. Again I will say moratorium was imposed to conserve the stocks of these animals. It is not culinary tradition at all. Some indigenous people's such in Okinawa and Hokkaido perhaps were lucky to catch some sleepy whales but from the shore or in a small boat canoe ?? But on a one on one basis not commercially. If your argument is for culinary purpose that just says that it is not science at all but for eating so it being said is proof that the catch in the name of science is bogus and so as such must be stopped. If the moratorium was not imposed then fine go ahead but those who put the rules in theory know what they are doing and so the numbers must have been dangerously low - hence moratorium. It is nothing personal as I said before Australia used to catch and eat them too but now we do not as to the law. Loopholes are merely excuses to do as u please.

In example, whale meat is a feature in traditional Shikoku (Kochi) cuisine. It has historical roots that pre-date the Sino-Japan war. Chosokabe Motochika, who unified Shikoku and/or his retainers are associated historically with some whale meat dishes, approx. late 16th Century.

The issue for Japan might be reducible to remaining as a signatory of the IWC or withdrawing. Upon withdrawal, no moratoriums would apply. The narratives that I have found on why Japan remains a signatory indicate that this was at the strong request of the US.

In example, whale meat is a feature in traditional Shikoku (Kochi) cuisine. It has historical roots that pre-date the Sino-Japan war. Chosokabe Motochika, who unified Shikoku and/or his retainers are associated historically with some whale meat dishes, approx. late 16th Century.

Don't know why you have to go back that far to call it "tradition". Japan has been whaling commercially using industrial scale ocean vessels since late 19th century up until the moratorium.

Hoko Onchi : 16th century sounds interesting is there somewhere I can read that please? I searched on the web nobunaga and chosokabe eras but couldn't find anything about whale meat. Not in English anyways? Yes there would be some ethnic groups way way back further than Australia's 200 years of eating whales I am sure - that is why they made the clause for traditional hunts to be able to continue. Shikoku and Okinawa, Hokkaido lots of places I imagine had ethnic groups - local tribesmen hunting and gathering. Very different to commercial whaling. Emperors courts and locals having a beer at today's pubs also very different to each other. If the emperor ate whale 5000 years ago really doesn't make it tradition for all Japanese people's. Most have never eaten whale. It is available though I have seen it at the shops in Ueno. Again I would like to say the idea of the moratorium is to conserve the species or they wouldn't see the need to have a moratorium now would they?