Home

Sales

Past Journeys

Future Trips

Contact/Newsletter

Photo Gallery

Save the Whales

 

Make sure you metion to support a motion for Australia to take Japan to the International Court of Justice( ICJ) because of Japan’s slaughter of whales and abuse of rights. You can write your own feelings about the pending whale slaughter or if you are to tight for time cut and paste the form letter I wrote to John Howard. You may need to make some adjustments so It is a bit personalized and not addresses to John, But to Dear Sir/Madam.........Read it through......... Go for it.

'Dem Natasha Stott Despoja' <senator.stottdespoja@aph.gov.au>, <senator.lees@aph.gov.au>, <senator.ridgeway@aph.gov.au>, 'Dem Andrew Murray' <senator.murray@aph.gov.au>, 'Dem Brian Greig' <senator.greig@aph.gov.au>, 'Dem Lyn Allison' <senator.allison@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Wilson Tuckey' <W.Tuckey.MP@aph.gov.au>, <B.Nelson.MP@aph.gov.au>, <Barry.Wakelin.MP@aph.gov.au>, <D.Kemp.MP@aph.gov.au>, <David.Hawker.MP@aph.gov.au>, <j.Hockey.MP@aph.gov.au>, <K.Elson.MP@aph.gov.au>, <Michael.Johnson.MP@aph.gov.au>, <senator.abetz@aph.gov.au>, <senator.calvert@aph.gov.au>, <senator.ellison@aph.gov.au>, <senator.minchin@aph.gov.au>, <senator.payne@aph.gov.au>, <T.Worth.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Alan Cadman' <A.Cadman.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Alan Eggleston' <senator.eggleston@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Alby Schultz' <Alby.Schultz.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Alex Somlyay' <Alex.Somlyay.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Alexander Downer' <A.Downer.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Andrew Southcott' <Andrew.Southcott.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Barry Haase' <Barry.Haase.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Bill Hefernan' <senator.heffernan@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Bob Baldwin' <Bob.Baldwin.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Bob Charles' <Bob.Charles.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Brian Gibson' <senator.gibson@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Bronwyn Bishop' <Bronwyn.Bishop.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Bruce Baird' <Bruce.Baird.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Cameron Thompson' <Cameron.Thompson.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Chris Pearce' <Chris.Pearce.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Christine Gallus' <C.Gallus.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Christopher Pyne' <C.Pyne.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Danna Vale' <Danna.Vale.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib David Jull' <David.Jull.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib David Tolner' <David.Tollner.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Don Randall' <Don.Randall.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Fran Bailey' <Fran.Bailey.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Gary Hardgrave' <Gary.Hardgrave.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Gary Nairn' <G.Nairn.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Geoffrey Prosser' <Geoffrey.Prosser.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib George Brandis' <senator.brandis@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Greg Hunt' <Greg.Hunt.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Helen Coonan' <senator.coonan@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Ian Campbell' <senator.campbell@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Ian MacDonald' <senator.ian.macdonald@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Ian Macfarlane' <Ian.Macfarlane.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Jackie Kelly' <Jackie.Kelly.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Jim Lloyd' <j.lloyd.mp@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib John Herron' <senator.herron@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib John Tierney' <senator.tierney@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib John Watson' <senator.watson@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Judi Moylan' <J.Moylan.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Julie Bishop' <Julie.Bishop.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Kay Patterson' <senator.kcpatterson@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Ken Ticehurst' <Ken.Ticehurst.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Kerry Bartlett' <Kerry.Bartlett.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Kevin Andrews' <Kevin.Andrews.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Mal Brough' <Mal.Brough.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Mal Washer' <Mal.Washer.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Margaret Reid' <senator.reid@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Neil Andrew' <Neil.Andrew.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Pat Farmer' <Pat.Farmer.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Patrick Secker' <Patrick.Secker.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Peter Dutton' <Peter.Dutton.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Peter King' <Peter.King.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Peter Lindsay' <Peter.Lindsay.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Peter Slipper' <Peter.Slipper.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Petro Georgiou' <P.Georgiou.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Philip Barresi' <Phil.Barresi.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Richard Alston' <richard.alston@dcita.gov.au>, 'Lib Rod Kemp' <senator.rod.kemp@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Ross Cameron' <Ross.Cameron.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Ross Lightfoot' <senator.lightfoot@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Sophie Panopoulos' <Sophie.Panopoulos.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Steven Ciobo' <Steven.Ciobo.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Stewart McArthur' <Stewart.McArthur.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Susan Knowles' <senator.knowles@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Susan Ley' <Sussan.Ley.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Tchen Tsebin' <senator.tchen@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Teresa Gambaro' <T.Gambaro.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Tony Abott' <Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Trish Draper' <T.Draper.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Lib Warren Entsch' <Warren.Entsch.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'Daryl Williams' <daryl.williams.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'NP Warren Truss' <W.Truss.MP@aph.gov.au>, <Bruce.Scott.MP@aph.gov.au>, <Ian.Causley.MP@aph.gov.au>, <J.Forrest.MP@aph.gov.au>, <John.Cobb.MP@aph.gov.au>, <Kay.Hull.MP@aph.gov.au>, <Luke.Hartsuyker.MP@aph.gov.au>, <P.Neville.MP@aph.gov.au>, <Peter.McGauran.MP@aph.gov.au>, <senator.boswell@aph.gov.au>, <senator.mcgauran@aph.gov.au>, <senator.sandy.macdonald@aph.gov.au>, "'NP De-Anne. Kelly'" <De-Anne.Kelly.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'NP John Anderson' <John.Anderson.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'NP Larry Anthony' <Larry.Anthony.MP@aph.gov.au>, 'NP Mark Vaile' <Mark.Vaile.MP@aph.gov.au>

Ring the PM

I urge you all to telephone the Prime Minister of Australia's office today and share your views about the Whales. Urge him to support a motion for Australia to take Japan to theInternational Cort of Justice( ICJ) because of Japan’s slaughter of whales and abuse of rights.

Phone:(02) 6277-7700 Fax: (02) 6273-4100

This is a direct line to his office staff. My call was answered by a fairly harried sounding receptionist ("Hello, Prime Minister's office") who put me on hold (with some cheesy 'relaxed and comfortable' easy listening music).

The secretary got back to me within about one minute and asked me how she could help me.I registered my views about the impending war at some length, during
which time she (apparently) listened. She said she'd pass on those views. Felt like a satisfying democratic exchange to me! I strongly urge you to pick up a phone right now and try it. Don't hog the line though, we should share the joy!

OR ring Parliament House - 02 6277 7111 - and say you want to give your message to the Prime Minister on what you think about the whales. They will
put you through to his office and take your message (and ask for your name etc)

CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESSES FOR LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

GO FORTH AND WRITE FROM YOUR HEART

editor@byronnews.com.au glw@greenleft.org.au tweed@gcb.newsltd.com.au opinions@northernstar.com.au advedit@adv.newsltd.com.au costellod@qnp.newsltd.com.au bsn@mullum.com.au editor@heraldtribune.com editorial.goulburnpost@ruralpress.com Dtmletr@matp.newsltd.com.au edletters@afr.fairfax.com.au letters@smh.fairfax.com.au letters@theage.fairfax.com.au letters@wanews.com.au mercuryedletter@dbl.newsltd.com.au webteam@newscorp.com.au cmletters@qnp.newsltd.com.au guardian@cpa.org.au mercury.news@dbl.newsltd.com.au hsletters@hwt.newsltd.com.au letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au staredit@northernstar.com.au editor@echonews.com Tweed News/Daily News letters@theaustralian.com.au letters@theage.com.au letters@smh.com.au

Humane Society International

IWC 57 will take place in June in Ulsan, Korea. This is a pivotal year. It is believed that Japan and the other pro-whaling nations may have a simple majority at this meeting. Pro conservation countries have been in the majority at the IWC since 1982 and such a shift will dramatically undermine the conservation mandate of the IWC. HSI has a team attending the IWC meeting in Korea, including Nicola Beynon, who is an advisor on the Australian delegation.

If they command a simple majority, Japan has stated that they intend to dismantle the Conservation Committee and all the whale welfare work done by the IWC to-date. They have also indicated that they will institute secret ballots and instruct the Scientific Committee to stop all research on the environmental threats impacting whales.  

Japan has also notified the IWC that they will put forward a Revised Management Scheme (RMS), to be adopted at this meeting, which includes the lifting of the commercial whaling moratorium. To adopt an RMS, Japan will need a ¾ majority.

Recently there has been significant momentum to adopt an RMS and lift the moratorium. The rush to adopt an RMS comes from the fact that Japan, Norway, and Iceland exploit loopholes in the Convention and kill increasing numbers of whales and additional species each year. Japan just announced that they will double their take of minke whales to 800 per year and add two new endangered whale species, fin and humpback to their hunt in Antarctica.

Some conservation countries believe that an RMS will somehow bring whaling under control. However, the current draft of the RMS is fundamentally flawed. It has no enforcement mechanisms, no penalties, no international inspectors, and no power to stop the most egregious expansions of whaling, i.e. scientific whaling and whaling under reservation/objection.   

If adopted, the RMS would be a management scheme in name only. It would provide no real safeguards for whale populations or for individual whales and it would provide no real consequences to nations that flouted the nominal rules it would impose. It does not even match the measures taken in modern fishery treaties to manage hunting of species far less vulnerable to cheating and over-exploitation than whales. In short, the draft RMS would create the same sort of chaotic conditions that led to the moratorium in the first place.

The only way to stop the abuses of scientific whaling and whaling under objection/reservation is to amend the Convention. New Zealand has proposed a Protocol to close the loopholes enshrined in the Convention. HSI strongly supports amending the Convention and believes this is the only way forward to restore credibility to the IWC and provide the necessary protection for whales.

HSI is also recommending that anti whaling countries such as Australia bring a case against Japan to the International Court of Justice, seeking a ruling that their exploitation of the loophole for scientific whaling is an ‘Abuse of Rights’.

Opening Statement to the 57th Meeting of the International Whaling Commission June 2005 by the Humane Society International

The current draft of the Revised Management Scheme (RMS) is fundamentally flawed, and any attempts to adopt an RMS at this meeting are not only unwarranted but would be extremely dangerous for the future conservation and protection of whales.

The simple truth is that from the IWC’s inception, whalers have exploited opportunities to evade whaling management and conservation regulations. Despite IWC regulations, whalers for decades routinely exceeded their permissible take and inaccurately reported the numbers of whales killed. As a result, whale populations continued to decline and by the 1970s, eight out of ten species of great whales covered by the Convention were commercially extinct. Having failed to properly regulate whaling, the Commission adopted an indefinite commercial whaling moratorium in 1982.

However, even when the moratorium went into effect in 1986, whaling continued because of exemptions in the Convention. This problem persists today, and nearly twenty years after the moratorium went into effect, 24,000 whales have been killed. 

Recently there has been greater momentum to adopt an RMS and lift the moratorium.  This motivation is not based upon the fact that civil society wants to see a return to whaling, or that whales are needed again for their oil or other products. Rather, the desire to adopt an RMS and lift the moratorium is based upon the fact that more and more whales are killed each year and the Commission has no way of controlling this expansion.  However, the RMS is not a panacea for unsustainable and uncontrolled whaling.   

The RMS draft does not contain even the minimal implementation and enforcement measures found in modern fisheries management organizations. Problems with the current draft include lack of adequate funding for controlling whaling, no procedures for imposing sanctions to address violations, no compliance mechanisms, and no welfare provisions.  Most importantly, an RMS even if it addressed the concerns mentioned above, cannot stop the abuses of Article VIII whaling or prevent countries from filing objections or a rejoining with a reservation to any or all regulatory measures in an RMS. 

Article VIII of the Convention allows member countries to exploit and kill whales at will for scientific research purposes. This right supersedes all conservation measures outlined in the Schedule including any RMS adopted into the Schedule.

If adopted, the RMS would be a management scheme in name only. It would provide no real safeguards for stocks or for individual whales and it would provide no real consequences to nations that flouted the nominal rules it would impose. In short, the RMS would create the same sort of chaotic conditions that led to the moratorium in the first place.

Instead of negotiating whether to adopt an RMS and lift the moratorium, member governments would better serve whale conservation and bolster the reputation of the IWC by amending the Convention to close the loopholes and modernize its provisions. The unfettered right to issue special permits and to whale under reservation/objection must be removed from the ICRW.  Moreover, new provisions allowing for enforcement and compliance, currently adopted in other fishery agreements, should be added to the Convention.

HSI therefore, supports a Protocol to the Convention that would close loopholes and add enforcement mechanisms, as a way to restore credibility to the IWC and provide the necessary protection for whales.

Competition Between Whales and Fisheries

Dr. Daniel Pauly is recognized around the world as a scientific expert on global fisheries and marine ecosystems. He is a Professor at the Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia (UBC), in Vancouver. Dr. Pauly is the Principal Investigator of the Sea Around Us Project, based at the Fisheries Centre, UBC, which is funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts, Philadelphia, USA, and devoted to studying the impact of fisheries on the world’s marine ecosystems. Dr. Pauly and Kristin Kaschner, PhD published a report entitled, “Competition between Marine Mammals and Fisheries: Food for Thought,” which will be available at the 57th IWC Meeting and on our website at www.hsus.org/foodforthought

The report states that as the current crisis of global fisheries worsens, the case has been increasingly put forward in international fora that culling whales would not only resolve the problems of fisheries but also help alleviate world hunger. The report presents results that clearly show there is no evidence that food competition between whales and fisheries is a global problem. Consequently, there is little basis to blame whales for the crisis world fisheries are facing today. There is even less support for the suggestion that we would solve any of these urgent global problems caused by a long history of mismanagement of fisheries by reducing whale populations.

The studies in the report show that most food consumed by whales consists of prey types that fisheries do not target. Further, whales consume most of their food in areas where humans do not fish. It is the continuation of present fisheries management approaches and the export of fisheries products from developing countries – not whales – that endanger food security.  

Humane Killing

HSI firmly believes that all present methods of killing whales are inhumane because, among other problems, they do not routinely or reliably render the animals instantaneously insensible.  Immediate insensibility is a requirement in any definition of “humane” in humane slaughter laws.

The IWC has been concerned with whale killing methods since 1957 when it defined “humane killing” as the process by which the animal is rendered instantaneously insensible until death supervenes. In spite of this, very little progress has been made on this issue.

This year the Whaling Killing Methods and Associated Welfare Issues Working Group will meet for the first time in three years. Earlier this year, two expert workshops on killing methods were held. The scientific experts at these meetings concluded that the current criteria that the IWC uses to determine death in cetaceans do not ensure that the animal is actually deceased. They recommend a series of tests in order to determine insensibility. These recommendations should be taken into account at the Working Group meeting.

The criteria for ensuring a painless death for cetaceans should be consistent with laws protecting other animals. According to the 1991 Animal Protection Law of this year’s host country, South Korea, “when animals are slaughtered, it must be done to the maximum extent possible using methods without pain.” HSI strongly supports IWC enacting and implementing strict humane standards for whale killing.  It is politically, legally, and ethically inconsistent to require humane slaughter methods for certain animals and not for others. 

For further information please contact

Humane Society International
enquiry@hsi.org.au
PO Box 439
Avalon NSW 2107
Australia
Tel: +61 (02) 9973 1728
Fax: +61 (02) 9973 1729

http://hsi.org.au/

Byron Bus load goes to Japanese Consulate in Brisbane to Protest to help the whales and Dolphins.

A Bus load of people from Byron travelled to the Japanese Consulate in Brisbane on Monday October 10th to help the whales and Dolphins. It was part of a world wide protest that happened outside Japanese embassies, consulates and offices.  Protest happened in Europe, Asia, USA and Australia by people disgusted over the ongoing slaughter of whales and dolphins by the Japanese Government.

Dean Jefferys from Byron Whale Action Group, BWAG said. "After just returning from an amazing week being with the whales in Hervey bay it felt like the whale where asking us to help stop the Japanese harpooning them when they return to the Antarctic. Although the whales are facing the possible reality of grenade tipped harpoons I didnt feel there fear or anger against humanity, just an immense love for all being. They are incredible heart felt intelligent creatures that can offer humanity so much. I feel by amercing oneself in their reality and helping to stop the dolphins and whales being killed buy the Japanese and other nations this can offer us an opportunity to see and feel the world as they see it. This insight could be just what humanity needs at this point in time."
 
In the last 20 years, Japan has permitted and encouraged the killing of  400,000 dolphins and porpoises in their coastal seas.  Many people from all over the world have watched in horror the dreadful dolphin drives which have been carried out in Futo, Taiji and the island of Iki.
 
Every year from September through April, fishermen hunt and kill about 20,000 dolphins and other whales in the most brutal way imaginable. This is the largest massacre of dolphins anywhere in the world. The fishermen say they kill the dolphins primarily as a form of "pest control." They say the dolphins eat too many fish, and that they are simply eradicating the competition.
 
A great deal of the dolphin meat is sold for pet food.   Some of the dolphins are also set aside in pens to be sold to the aquarium industry which preys on dolphins captured by these annual hunts.  Japanese authorities have gone to great lengths to prevent photos and videos being taken of the brutality but brave activists have managed to obtain the evidence.
 
Byron Bay whale activist Sue Arnold has been to Futo where she, like other activists who have gone to Japan to protest the dolphin drives, was completely traumatised by the experience.   She was told by locals how the dolphins who escape the nets often die of shock from witnessing the brutal murders as Japanese fishermen wade in to the waters hacking to death mothers and calves.   The bay at Futo runs red with blood.
 
It is time that Japan was made aware that these crimes against nature are no longer tolerated by the civillised world.
With its new so called scientific whaling proposal, know as JARPA 2 which targets l7,000 minke whales, 800 Fin and 800 Humpback for slaughter, Japan has taken its place as the Pol Pot of Mother Nature.

For the Whales and Dolphins

Dean Jefferys

 

ATTRIBUTE PHOTO TO AUSTRALIANS FOR ANIMALS. IT WAS TAKEN IN FUTO.

Subject: JAPAN DOLPHIN DAY

To read Sue Arnolds full report of the IWC meeting in Korea click the following echo link

http://www.echo.net.au/archives/20_06/pdf/p15.pdf

400 people and around 20 whales attend the Opening of Whale watching season at Byron Bay today Sunday 19th June.
While Trish and Wally Franklin were giving their whale presentation they where upstaged by a couple of large humpback passing within a hundred meters of the cape and the excited crowd. Labor MP for Richmond, Justine Elliot gave a small speach about her and Australias deep feelings for the whales and said she hand deliver the hundreds of letters and drawings to John Howard and to the Japanese ambassador in Canberra on the Monday. One whale seemed very happy about the gathering and performed around 10 breaches for the extatic crowd. People present left feeling a deep conection and hope these and all whales would be protected. See Image Gallery for some photos of the day. Most of these photos have been sent to Greenpeace in Korea to project onto a building near the IWC meeting. Please keep a candle burning and prayers and meditations happening over the next 4 days of the IWC meeting. Stay tuned on this page for daily Update reports from Sue Arnold in Korea at the IWC meeting.

Report from Sue Arnold in Korea, IWC meeting, Monday June 20th

Hi Dean,

tried emailing you the other day and it kept bouncing. the good news is that
japan has been defeated all day today.. these are the issues we won.

stopped japan and her puppets voting for secret ballots
stopped japan trying to change agenda which would have meant end of
discussions on new sanctuaries; whale watching, whale killing methods; and an
attempt to can the conservation committee and change to one on sustainable use.

tomorrow is the vote on the RMS. However, as far as scientific whaling is
concerned, we should be deeply conceerned. The minister had an impromptu
press conference this morning, said he would not impose sanctions against
japan, would not take the issue out of the IWC.. made lots of noises about
japan taking us back to the dark ages but there is no definitive plan of
action to stop japan. he also said later that if japan;s science was peer
reviewed and stood up as science then it seems australia will have no argument.
this is disappointing.

japan held a press conference and said they regarded whales as fish. the
arguments are a) blue whales are not recovering in antarctic so humpbacks and
fin must be killed as they are eating blue whales food and b) poor and
undeveloped countries are not getting enough food and need to kill whales.
japan claims that 80% of japanese support whaling.

have to go back to the meeting, hope this gets through. Its very tense here in
Ulsan, countries who support japan can still vote if they pay up the money and
that is entirely possible. bottom line is that there is absolutely no change
in the scientific whaling quota and NOT likely to be.. the humpbacks are at
great risk and it doesnt seem that the feds will do anything other than mouth
a lot of rhetoric. At least 400 NGO groups have signed on to a press release
opposing scientific whaling but its clear we have to lobby the fed govt very
very hard on this.. and the state govt as well. International Court,
sanctions against Japan, cancel Free trade agreement and ban japanese fishing
vessels from our ports.

cheers sue

More news from Korea
fantastic news from greenpeace... korea has pulled out from building the new proposed whale meat house by pressure from greenpeace. Yeah

Report/Email from Sue Arnold in Korea, Tuesday

Hi Dean,

just a little more for your website.

The silence of the US Government at this IWC meeting has everyone talking. In
the past the US has been one of the most vocal delegations, stridently
defending whales. Not so in Ulsan.

It was nothing short of extraordinary yesterday to see a press conference
opposing Japan's scientific whaling program run by Australia, New Zealand,
Germany and the UK. These countries are known as the ' like minded ' and in the
past, the US has led the like minded. Now the US is known as a mushie, a sad
commentary on yet another ramification of the Bush Administration.

Last week in the Working Groups ( all observers had to maintain confidentiality
until this week) the head of the US delegation astonished activists by
supporting the Revised Management Scheme in no uncertain terms. " The US has
long supported the completion of the RMS," he said. It was also clear that the
US doesnt want to support a voluntary code on scientific whaling ( a Japanese
demand). The rumours that the US would do a deal with Japan by accepting a
resumption of commercial whaling in exchange for an end to Japan's scientific
whaling are rife and given considerable weight by the US silence .

Many people are expressing despair of the IWC and suggesting that perhaps the
only way out is a compromise; that limited commercial whaling is better than
uncontrolled whaling. This is a totally unacceptable situation and no one
should be persuaded that such a suggestion is a solution. What is clear is
that the IWC is incapable of protecting whales and that the focus of activism
to protect whales is going to be on our national governments.

Finally, the Greenpeace action which has stopped the whale factory being built
in Ulsan is a temporary victory unfortunately. The city authorities have put
the stoppers on the factory for the moment. The protest is taking place close
to Ulsan's newly built whaling museum, which is surrounded by whale
restaurants. At the Ulsan fish markets its not hard to find great slabs of
whale meat, including flippers and meat which obviously comes from baleen
whales. Koreans love whale meat and Ulsan consumes more than 80% of the
whale " by-catch ".

cheers, Sue

MEDIA RELEASE TUESDAY 21ST

AUSTRALIANS FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL

PO Box 673, Byron Bay, NSW 2381  

Australia will bring to the IWC a Resolution on Japan's Scientific Whaling Program.    Supported by 25 member countries the Resolution is unlikely to bring about any change in Japan's de fact commercial quota.

Senator Ian Campbell has made it quite clear at a press conference held yesterday that Australia will seek to resolve the JARPA 11 program within the IWC.   His statements indicate that the Federal Government will rely on diplomatic means and the media to bring Japan in to line.

This strategy will not work, says Australians for Animals Co-ordinator, Sue Arnold.

" It is extremely disappointing to hear from the Minister that Australia will not impose sanctions against Japan.   The Resolution is, in my opinion, extremely weak and fails to defend the whale watching industries of Australia, New Zealand and the small Pacific countries who rely on whale watching for tourist dollars.

" The resolution calls on Japan to withdraw its JARPA 2 proposal or revise it to use non lethal methods.    It is quite obvious that Japan has no intention of withdrawing its proposal.

" The resolution does not detail the fact that data available on Humpback whales cannot agree on any population estimates; that Japan's estimates are more than double other organisation's estimates.

" Unless Australia and New Zealand bite the bullet and take Japan to the International Court of Justice, the JARPA 2 program will proceed and the Humpback whales will be driven to extinction by the Japanese so-called scientific whaling program.

" Australians need to ferociously lobby the Howard Government to take decisive action against Japan.    Senator Campbell's rhetoric is strong but the Minister needs to walk his talk."

Sue Arnold can be contacted in Ulsan on : 0011 82 1056772341

21 st June, 2005

Following is a good link to the 7.30 report TV PROGRAM TRANSCRIPT
Australian Broadcasting Corporation

LOCATION: http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2005/s1397468.htm
Broadcast: 21/06/2005
Pro-whaling nations lose bid
Reporter: Jonathan Harley

Report/Email from Sue Arnold in Korea, Wed 22nd 8am

There will be ANOTHER RMS proposal put up later this week by Denmark, Sweden,
Finland AND THE USA which will lead to another push for a resumption of
commercial whaling next year. It is very clear that Japan's puppets (coastal
states) can and probably will grant themselves scientific whaling permits,just
like Japan has, that they will try to use the provisions of the Law of the Sea
to whale in their national waters .

There is no resolution on scientific whaling and Japan will now go ahead with
its program killing humpbacks with a vengeance. The population estimates Japan
is using in the Antarctic are treble the IWC numbers.

I m really frightened for the whales, so are most activists here. We see the
headlines in the newspapers and know the public will think its all over and the
whales are safe, NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.

The Minister for the Environment needs to walk his talk. Japan has to be
stopped from proceeding with its Scientific whaling program,this will only
happen if there is mega protest from Australians directed at Howard. The battle
has only just begun. Australia's resolution opposing Japan's S/W is only useful
diplomatically and in the media, the Japanese are putting up a similar
resolution today which supports whaling. We have to have sanctions against
Japan, there has to be action, not words. More later, cheers sue

Saving the whale again, SMH Editorial
June 22, 2005

It is round one to the whales at that acrimonious annual showdown between conservationists and the whaling lobby at the International Whaling Commission. But there is little cause for celebration. Japan's failure to swing an early majority vote behind the pro-whaling camp at this week's commission meeting in Ulsan, South Korea, is not a victory for the whales - it is merely another reprieve.

It has been almost two decades since the commission imposed a global moratorium on commercial whaling, and the heartening recovery of even the most endangered whale species is clearly visible off Australia's coastline. But the whale was never definitively saved. Nor did the commission intend to do so. Its original 1946 mandate was to assist the orderly development of the whaling industry by managing whale stocks. The moratorium was imposed because the industry was in danger of killing itself off as global whale numbers collapsed - not because whales are highly intelligent wild creatures and should never again be subject to the cruelty of slaughter. This has always meant a case could be made for tightly managed whaling once populations recovered. And this is exactly the campaign being waged by the pro-whaling lobby led by Japan, Norway and Iceland.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

The pro-whalers are upping the ante, locking Australia and other pro-conservation nations such as New Zealand, Britain and the United States, into a perpetual diplomatic battle inside the commission just to keep the moratorium in place. It is a dirty numbers game. In recent years Japan has stacked the commission with a host of impoverished nations with no historical link to whaling. Tokyo has traded what is euphemistically termed fisheries aid for votes in favour of the resumption of commercial whaling. Landlocked Benin and Mongolia, for example, are now unlikely champions of commercial whaling. But Japan is not the first nation to use aid to politicise or compromise an international body. An international system must offer every sovereign nation a vote, no matter how small. It is inherently vulnerable to the influence of the strong and rich over the small and poor. Criticising Japan's tactics, however, will only end in a slanging match. Less than a third of the world's nations are represented on the commission. It is incumbent on Australia and the conservationist bloc to recruit more concerned nations to their cause.

The second prong of Japan's strategy is to do whatever it wants anyway. Using a commission loophole, Japan intends to increase its annual scientific kill to 1000, including the endangered fin and humpback whales. Australia, too, must continue to pursue alternative strategies. It must keep pushing to shift the commission's mandate away from whaling and towards conservation. But it must also continue to seek permanent protection for whales in a South Pacific sanctuary or through alternative mechanisms, such as the International Court of Justice or the United Nations Convention on Migratory Species. In the 1980s, the Save the Whale campaign became the icon of the global environmental movement. Many wrongly assume the battle was won - it has a long way to go.

David Suzuki speaks out: Scientific Whaling Program Weak on Science

Scientific Whaling Program Weak on Science -- An ENN Commentary

June 22, 2005 By Dr. David Suzuki, David Suzuki Foundation

I'm no economist, but from my understanding of the basics, when supply
overshoots demand, prices will drop and producers will generally lower
production accordingly.

Well, simple economics apparently doesn't apply to whaling. This week,
the Japanese government asked the International Whaling Commission (IWC)
to double its annual whaling quota of Antarctic minke whales to nearly
1,000 animals. It also wants to take an additional 50 humpback and 50
fin whales. At the same time, demand for whale meat in Japan is in
serious decline.

So why expand the hunt now? Japan says the move will further "scientific
research." Critics say it is really a thinly disguised expansion of
commercial whaling. Whatever Japan's motives are, the reality is that
there has been little scientific benefit from its whaling program and,
interestingly, increasingly smaller economic benefits.

Commercial whaling was banned by the IWC in 1986 when whale populations
the world over crashed and public sentiment turned against whale hunts.
Since then, Japan has killed more than 8,000 whales for "scientific
research" and sold the meat. However, as sales have declined, the
Japanese government has started promoting whale meat through product
giveaways and whale cookbooks in hopes of renewing consumer interest.

With whale meat demand dropping, it seems like a strange time for Japan
to be doubling its catch. Of course, Japan insists that its interest in
whaling is scientific, not economic. However, according to an analysis
by a group of researchers from Australia, Japan and the United States
recently published in the journal Nature, Japan's whaling program is
also of dubious scientific value.

For example, the scientific whaling program has been operating for 18
years, yet it has resulted in very few published papers. None of them
has appeared in the International Whaling Commission's own journal, in
spite of the journal's emphasis on stock management - a supposed focal
point of the Japanese program. And only one published paper by the
program in any journal over nearly two decades has been relevant to the
issue of species management.

If Japan carries out its expanded program, over the next 18 years
whalers will take some 17,000 minke whales, 820 fin whales and 800
humpback whales from the Antarctic, in addition to an expanded Pacific
hunt. According to the Japanese proposal, the increased hunt will
benefit ecosystems - including whales. It argues that a selective cull
of humpbacks and fins will reduce competition for food (krill) with the
endangered blue whale, thereby increasing the world's largest animal's
chance of recovering. Critiacs, however, point out that competition
amongst whale species is hardly a major issue today, as whale
populations are a mere fraction of what they were a century ago.
Furthermore, population trends for all whale species are highly
uncertain. Finally, the research used to justify the Japanese hypothesis
is largely from unreviewed and unpublished data collected through
Japan's own controversial program.

All this makes it exceptionally difficult to justify an expanded hunt,
especially since humpback whales are internationally listed as a
threatened species and fin whales are endangered. Faced with an array of
ocean threats, including pollution and climate change, many whale
populations could not handle the added burden of hunting.

There is no credible scientific basis for expanding Japan's whale hunt.
Nor is there much of an economic one. Giving away blubber ice cream, as
the Japanese government did in 2002 to encourage citizens to develop a
taste for the stuff, hardly amounts to a strong and growing market. The
IWC clearly needs to reexamine the justification of whaling in the name
of science. If Japan's program is any indication, there's little
knowledge to be gained.
--

Just say no to the barbaric Canadian seal massacre. 350,000 baby harp
seals clubbed, shot and skinned alive in front of their mothers! It's
the largest slaughter of marine mammals in the world and the most
obscene act ever perpetrated on animals in the history of humanity. *
**PLEASE BOYCOTT CANADIAN SEAFOOD, TOURISM, 2010 COMMONWEALTH GAMES!*
It's the only way to stop this atrocity.
http://www.seashepherd.org ........ http://www.harpseals.org .....
http://www.fisherycrisis.com
http://www.essentialoilcookbook.com/html/fringe-seals.htm

Anti whaling countries such as Australia MUST bring a case against Japan to the International Court of Justice, seeking a ruling that their exploitation of the loophole for scientific whaling is an ‘Abuse of Rights’. "Take Japan to the International Court of Justice NOW"