Effects of Illegal Whaling in The Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary on Benthic and Pelagic Ecosystems

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 roughly three million whales were slaughtered in the twentieth century alone? Or that there are only around four hundred North Atlantic right whales alive today because they never fully recovered from being hunted? These whales are known as “right” whales because they are large and slow, with thick blubber that yields lots of oil plus they remain afloat after they've been killed, this simplifies the whole hunting process for everyone . Furthermore, the hunters got more money for less work. I believe that whaling is a vile and pointless thing to do to such beautiful creatures and that the International Whaling Commission should look further into the use of whales for research.

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

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.

I do not agree with Japan and Norway since all global agreements should be followed. Allowing these nations to continue whaling despite all other countries complying may lead to a dangerous precedent where many nations living with endangered species like Lions and elephants will also follow suit and demand exemption

According to Greenpeace, “up to 80% of [Japanese] respondents disagreed with whaling on the high seas. And 85% said they did not know endangered species were being hunted by Japanese ships in the Antarctic Ocean”(Ganderton, 2014). More than that, both Japan and Norway have significantly declining sales of whale meat. The impact of whaling on small fishing villages might impact my opinion on this issue, but I don’t think the impact is significant enough to warrant whaling, especially when, for example in Norway, the government has to subsidize the whaling industry because they can’t sell enough meat to

The endangerment of the Blue whale has come as a result of not only direct harm such as hunting, but also indirect factors like environmental changes and boat collisions. However, none have drove the Blue whale to endangerment as much as commercial whaling, which is still practiced today by three remaining countries: Japan, Norway, and Iceland. Through various controversial studies on whether whaling should be illegal word wide, one must constantly question the importance of the Blue Whale for success of the planet’s future.

Despite claiming the slaughter is needed to learn more about whales, Japan has not offered any new worthwhile information about whales, with the exception that they eat large quantities of krill (Zelko, 2013, p. A. 13) . Japan has been using this excuse, among many others, since 1986. In the decades Japan has used this excuse, it seems almost ridiculous that Japan has not learned anything new about the mammals’ breeding, migratory, or any other habits. When Australia took Japan to the International Court of Justice to challenge the validity of Japan’s scientific whaling industry, Australia’s agent to the court, Bill Campbell, stated, “Japan seeks to cloak its ongoing commercial whaling in the lab coat of science.” He later told journalists: “You don’t kill 935 whales a year to conduct scientific research. You don’t even need to kill one whale to conduct scientific research” (McCurry, 2013) .

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

Claims of ‘cultural activity’ on the level of Norwegian and Japanese whaling must be balanced against world opinion. I do believe that an international panel that has not only environmental preservation but cultural preservation at heart will generally be very supportive of the protection of whales. The preservation of the whales cannot be ignored nor can it be left up to Norway and Japan to make their own decisions where this is

Me and my crew here on the waves of the Antarctic sea have not seen nor tracked any signs of a blue whale since our scientific equipment became operational two weeks ago. The blue whale, the largest animal on planet Earth, has been labeled as endangered on the conservation status chart for more than fifty years and has yet to change. Ever since the banning of blue whale hunting in 1966, blue whales have not increased in population at the rate we have predicted. To this day, even with all the limits hunters have on the ocean, blue whales struggle with accidental beaching and ship collisions.

Japan has consistently opposed IWC regulations and currently whales the North Pacific and Southern Ocean around Antarctica for “research” purposes. 5 Japan’s spokesmen for the IWC claim that a few coastal towns are actually suffering from the moratorium on commercial whaling.

1. I totally disagree with the Norwegian and Japanese exemption for whaling even if it’s their tradition. The Japanese government claims hunting whale is based on their traditional culture and Japanese fishers have hunted whales for few hundred years so that none of foreign countries has right to control if Japanese people should eat whales or not. Whales were important protein for Japanese people between 1940s and 1960s, and they killed more than 24 grand whales in 1964 (BBC, 2016). In addition,

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 has become a global environmental issue as vast numbers of whales are killed commercially and scientifically every year. Intense debate on the necessity of whaling has been stirred but failed to be resolved due to the lacking of pragmatic measures employed by the responsible parties. Whaling nations continue to defend their whaling right for cultural and research purposes. Yet, ethical and humanity issues are among the controversial disputes raised by concerned public. In February 2010, International Whaling Commission (IWC) proposed a plan of lifting whaling ban by limiting scientific whaling activities with the intention of reducing overall number of whales killed besides solving the current impasse between pro