Why Is Whaling Justified?

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

In the 1800s the Northern Right Whales were killed mainly because their bodies have oily fat, which was used as a fuel at the time, they were also killed to make umbrellas, and whips (Endangered wildlife of the world). Other reasons for the Northern Right Whale being endangered is due to habitat pollution, Toxins, Climate and ecosystem change, Ruckus from whale-watching activities and noise from industrial activities. Also the death of the whales now is due to ship collisions and entanglement in fishing gear has limited the population’s recovery

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.

Their purpose is to prevent the overhunting of whales, however, their regulations were loose and the quotas were high (Marrero and Thornton 2011). Whales continued to perish. The IWC ultimately created whale free sanctuaries in the Indian Ocean (1979) and the ocean surrounding Antarctica (1994). In 1982, the IWC called for a moratorium on commercial whaling, but both Norway and Japan voted against this policy (Marrero and Thornton 2011). Today, Norway supports hunting minke whales for meat, while Japan allows whaling for scientific purposes, which many experts question. Despite the general moratorium, limited whaling is permitted to indigenous cultures that have traditionally hunted. According to Dave Weller, a research biologist at NOAA’s Southwest Fisheries Science Center, he says Pacific gray whale populations have recovered (Marrero and Thornton 2011). Aside from the moratorium, the IWC has collected valuable data and provide analysis that helps researchers understand the status of various whale

The Cove, directed by Louie Psihoyos, is an award winning documentary that spotlights how the Japanese hunt and kill dolphins by the tens of thousands and how a group of people try to stop and expose this to the world. The chapter about the International Whaling Commission (IWC) brings forward a few key points that need to be discussed. The IWC is a group of nations that come together and make decisions based on how they can preserve cetaceans. The smaller cetaceans, like dolphins, are not protected under the bigger umbrella. In order to bypass the rules of the IWC, a loophole is used; a nation can claim that they are killing and collecting whales for research and the IWC will not stop them. The Japanese are trying to legalize whaling worldwide.

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

Supposedly, in Japan, the whales are killed for their meat for science however they were instead being sold in food markets or even given away for free to hospitals and schools. This encourages the consumption of whale meat. The Japanese kill many different types of whales for example, 200 minke whales, 100 sei whales, 50 bryde’s and 10 sperm whales under scientific research. There is also Norway, which didn’t respect the IWC ban until 1993 as they continued hunting for minke whales. Norway has a fixed number of whalers its whalers are permitted to kill for commercial reasons.

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.

Legal arguments used by both Norway and Japan to oppose IWC and other regulations on whaling are underlined with the idea that there is no scientific evidence to support the moratorium. Also, the threat of economic sanctions is in violation of GATT trading rules,

[Note to student reviewer: This paper answers the assignment’s six “Questions for Discussion”, but not in a one-for-one order. A synthesis of the questions and an examination of the concerns over protecting local cultures from the impacts of globalization, as they pertain to whale hunting, are presented. To assist the reviewer, question numbers have been included in brackets, denoting which section answers a specific assignment question.]

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