Arguments Against Whaling

The debate surrounding Makah whaling is a heated one to say the least. There are valid points on both sides of the argument, but there is one side I find to be more valid once the facts have been looked at. I will examine and present my findings regarding past and current laws and regulations related to whaling, types of whaling, other countries that take an active part in whaling (and why), as well as the Makah culture – both past and present. In this paper I will argue why the Makah should not be allowed to resume whaling, as it is unnecessary and could potentially put the grey whale species back on the endangered list.

Did you know that in the last 50 years over two million whales have been killed? The United States views whaling very differently than Japan does. It is a complicated and controversial topic. Many people have opinions about whale hunting. However, everyone should know both sides of the whale hunting issues before they act on the issue. To start out I am going to tell you a little about whaling. The first whale hunters were in the prehistoric times. At first they would just kill and eat beached whales. That became such a habit that they started hunting them. Most whale hunters use harpoons, guns, lances, or bombs that blow up inside the whale. They use catcher boats, or kayaks. In 1925, whalers developed

When whaling was first started in America it was because the Basques had started hunting and trading products made from whales. First it was the Dutch that had followed them in their whaling and then the British followed them. Finally, America followed the British and soon the huge expedition had started to hunt whales for the oil inside them.

Whale hunting is a very controversial issue. Some argue that it is morally wrong to hunt an animal with such a high level of intelligence, some argue that whales shouldn’t be hunting due to their dwindling numbers and their risk for extinction, and others argue that it is the only means of food for some indigenous people who have been hunting whales for centuries. I personally, am against commercial whaling, but do understand the IWC’s (International Whaling Commission) catch limits for aboriginal subsistence whaling.

Whaling has been occurring for over thousands of years. Norwegians and the Japanese’s where the first to hunt whales, as early as 4,000 years ago (Marrero and Thornton 2011). Whaling traditions varied in different parts of the globe, for instance the Inuit hunted in the Arctic Ocean, the Basque hunted in the Atlantic, and the Japanese hunted in the Pacific. All these cultures relied on whales to provide material goods for food,

In my opinion, by doing this it would balance both whale hunting and whale watching and I do not feel people then would have any problem because they know that whale hunting cannot completely stop as so many people would lose their jobs but this would at least make it better for people who like whale watching. By limiting the amount of whale hunting, owners of fin whaling company like Kristjan Loftsson might lose some profit on the year but at least no one will be against them if they do not over hunt the whales. As Kristjan Loftsson believes “the world has wrongly turned against him”, just shows that he does think of other people’s opinions on whale hunting and if they set a quota to a reasonable number then people won’t have a problem and he would not think that the world is against him as he thinks now. People all around the world will not question the owners and they will still enjoy watching the whales for wild

Hunting whales was not on an industrial scale until the 1890’s, and continued until the International Whaling Commission took effect in 1986. The article refers to the unsustainability of whaling commercially. The number of whales in our oceans has been rapidly reducing in the years that humans have had access to commercial whaling ships. Hunting an endangered species is highly unethical, because we could, within a generation or two, see the fall of the largest beings alive today. The whales in our oceans belong to the whole world and not just to Japan and Norway. Even with the restrictions by the IWC, Japan still continues for “Scientific Research”. Scientific Research has recently been deemed illegal in the Arctic water, but they have completely disregarded all sanctions put against them to try and stop the unethical whaling.

The increase in the fishing industry could be due to any number of things such as the weather, the time of year, or even the lack of a whale’s presence. It does not suggest that the whales are consuming the fish or that they are depleting important fish populations. Also, it has been proven that commercial whaling does impact the whaling industries in pro whaling countries. If money is the end goal for some of these countries they could just adopt the whale watching industry rather than commercial whaling because in the end, due to conservation movements, it will probably be making more money. If Japan wants to continue whaling under scientific research pretenses, then I’m sure they can find more humane and less invasive ways to collect data such as studying beached or already dead whales rather than killing them, as well as taking samples from live whales using minimally invasive techniques. Furthermore, in countries such as Norway who commercially whale specifically for the meat for human consumption, well they should be required to put warning labels on whale meat detailing how the animal was killed as well as how much mercury the meat

The Ocean Conservancy is a nonprofit organization that focuses on protecting and preserving marine wildlife and its habitats. The Ocean Conservancy was founded in 1972 as the Delta Corporation. One of the Ocean Conservancy’s first priorities was starting the ‘Whale Protection Fund’, which advocated for the saving of whales from hunters and protesting commercial whaling by countries in Asia and Europe. The organization realized that they had to raise support from the public to invest in scientific research. Soon, they were able to spread the message and raise awareness about the whaling industry. The organization’s effort paid off in 1982, when the International Whaling Commission banned commercial whaling.

Since 1966, commercial hunting of whales has been prohibited by the International Whaling Commission (iwc.int). However, some countries still hunt them, such as Japan, Norway and Iceland, for instance, killing of these mammals is permitted for scientific research and a few more are killed by Japanese in the Southern Ocean for blubber and their meat.

Commercial whaling is a serious world issue that has always been difficult for those who are in support and those who are against it. Each group defends their side with convincing arguments. Morally, whaling is wrong, but do the reasons for whaling outweigh the reasons to cease the primitive hunts? By studying the effects of whaling,realizing how culture has changed over time, and taking note of the money that would be saved, it can clearly be seen that there is no longer a current need for whaling to continue. Efforts have been made to try to stop whaling, but with no help from any authoritative figure,nothing has been done to regulate the whaling. The famous sea shepherd, known for its strikes against whaling, can even be seen on

Whaling is defined as hunting and killing of whales by humans for resources, mainly meat, blubber and baleen (whalebone) obtained from whales. These resources are then sold for commercial purposes and thus, whaling has become economical important for centuries (Joanne 2007; The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia 2007). Scientific whaling is conducted by hunting whales for research purposes and further analysis to study on whale’s behaviour, characteristics and distribution (Joanne 2007). Commercial whaling is a controversial whaling practice that exploits whale products for trade and profit. Recently, Japan, Norway and Iceland are the major contributors of commercial whaling and deeply support any other whaling activities (Joanne 2007). Moratorium on commercial whaling 1986 is a global ban of hunting whales for commercial purposes, implemented by International Whaling Commission (IWC). Under Article VIII, unlimited scientific research is permitted but sufficient data and analysis are required by Science Committee set up by IWC (Papastavrou 2006).

The ban is an outright violation of Japan and Norway’s sovereignty. How can one country in the globe dictate laws in isolation and come up with sanctions for non-compliance without mutual agreement between all parties? It is also critical to note that the actions of some of these people do not endanger the species of animal concerned. Although the number of whales in these countries would decrease over time, any concerned group should

To form an opinion on whether we should permit hunting of non-endangered species of whales, we need substantial background information on the pros and cons of whaling and the impacts of it on the effected society or societies. We need to do extensive research on the positions of both sides and weigh their arguments against our own judgements. Therefore, I will leave the first question for now and I will give an answer to it at the end of this essay after I have put forward my arguments.

For centuries nations across the globe have hunted a variety of animals to provide for their inhabitants’ diets and economies, which for some species has resulted in endangerment or extinction. Several species of whale have become endangered because of the process of whale hunting, and in order to combat excessive whale hunting the International Whaling Comission (IWC) set forth a ban in 1986 to halt the whaling industry (International Whaling Comission, n.d.); however, nations such as Norway and Japan insisted that their practices continue on the basis of cultural exception. The economies of their whaling regions, they argued, would be put into danger by the moratorium, and so the nations have been allowed to continue hunting small amounts of the non-endangered winke whales and, in some cases, fin whales.