Aid, Biodiversity, Development & Aid, Economy & Trade, Environment, Global, Global Geopolitics, Headlines, Humanitarian Emergencies, North America

Fighting Off Criticism, IWC Looks to Rein in Whaling

Matthew O. Berger

WASHINGTON, May 28 2010 (IPS) - It may seem odd that an outright ban on whaling would not be the most effective way to prevent the controversial practice, but that is exactly what the International Whaling Commission is betting on.

“The reality is that whaling has not stopped. The moratorium has improved a lot of species, but whaling has not stopped,” Monica Medina, head of the U.S. delegation to the IWC, told reporters here on Thursday.

After two and a half decades of a moratorium on commercial whaling, most whale populations have rebounded, but whaling has never fully stopped due to a handful of countries using loopholes in the treaty to flout its conservation goal. Recognising that failure, the IWC is now proposing allowing a limited number of legal whale catches in order to bring existing whaling within sustainable limits.

But the response from those who campaigned so hard to get the 1986 ban enacted has been disbelief, and over the past month since the IWC’s Apr. 22 announcement the commission has scrambled to defend its proposals.

A series of protests took place along the U.S. West Coast Wednesday. Their message, generally, was that allowing the killing of some whales is no way to end the killing of whales.

Greenpeace says that a much easier solution to end the taking of whales would be to simply close the loopholes that allow countries like Japan to catch hundreds of whales a year, supposedly in the name of scientific research. Iceland and Norway have also flouted the moratorium’s ban.

The IWC will meet next month in Agadir, Morocco, to discuss what conservation actions it should take over the next 10 years. For now the proposals on the table are just that – proposals, its chair, Cristian Maquieira, emphasised Thursday.

He said there seems to be the sense out there that this is decided, but that is “not at all the case”.

“The numbers will be dealt with in Agadir,” Maquieira said. “Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.”

He has repeated the same mantra over the last month: the status quo is failing to protect whales and it is important to reach a compromise to which all members of the IWC will agree.

The IWC is a voluntary organisation and members can opt out of regulations or withdraw completely. Norway, for instance, lodged an objection to the 1986 moratorium. After withdrawing in 1992, Iceland rejoined the IWC in 2002, but with a reservation that allowed the moratorium to not apply to it. Japan withdrew its initial objection to the moratorium but continues to whale under research permits.

Japan’s self-imposed whaling quota for this last season was 935 minke whales and 50 endangered fin whales. They fell substantially short of that goal due to disruption by protestors on the high seas. One of those protestors, New Zealander Peter Bethune, pleaded guilty Thursday to four of five charges filed against him in Japanese courts Thursday.

That Japanese whale catch is one of problems Maquieira sees with the status quo. But he is hopeful something better can be worked out.

The proposed quota of whales is seen as too low by Japan, he says. Medina says the U.S. thinks the numbers are too high.

“I think the current proposal does impose pain on both sides and we’re going to work to” narrow the gap, Maquieira said. He expects a successful compromise to contain equal numbers of concessions to whaling countries and countries who want greater whale conservation.

“The negotiation will be very intense but I do look forward to a positive outcome in Agadir,” he said.

One major problem conservation organisations see with the proposal as it currently stands is that it would allow for whaling within the Southern Ocean Sanctuary in which commercial whaling has been ostensibly banned since 1994.

But Japan routinely hunts in those waters, which is just one way in which it has become clear that the IWC has lost control over the whaling activities of the handful of whaling countries.

Medina pointed out another case. When it was discovered in March that a Santa Monica, California, sushi restaurant was serving whale meat, the IWC did not know where that meat had come from. She believes the IWC would be much more legitimate and able to serve its conservation function if it were able to trace that meat back to the offending country.

“The idea would to cap whaling and get that whaling under the IWC’s control,” she said.

“The IWC is not working as it should,” said Maquieira, “The IWC as an organisation has lost control of all whaling whatsoever, except indigenous whaling.”

The IWC believes its proposal will result in some 3,200 fewer whales being killed over the next decade compared with the number that would be taken if the 2005-2009 catch levels were continued, and over 14,000 less than if the limits set unilaterally by whaling countries in 2009 were met throughout the decade. Subsistence whaling by indigenous communities is allowed under the moratorium and not included in those numbers.

These proposals were the result of a process that began when the IWC determined it should start a process of bringing whaling under the control of the IWC, said Maquieira. “Initially this process was to be of a procedural nature but it became clear more would be necessary.”

The prospects for agreement in Agadir are still unclear.

For its part, said Medina, “The U.S. will continue to work on the proposals, but doesn’t see it as being at a place were we can agree on it yet.”

She laid out her delegations’ objectives: improve the conservation of whales, improve research on whales, and address new and emerging threats such as climate change.

Maquieira, while optimistic, expects plenty of tough negotiations before the sides reach a workable compromise.

“I’m taking bets on the outcome, in case anyone’s interested,” he joked.