Saturday, April 22, 2006
FAQ #2
Q: Aren't Iceland, Japan and Norway whaling illegally?
A: No, the whaling activities of all three nations are within the rules of the IWC.
The claim of illegality is usually made in reference to the IWC's zero catch limit (moratorium on commercial whaling), which has been in place since 1986.
Norway is the only nation currently conducting commercial whaling. Norway's whaling is legal because Norway lodged an objection to the introduction of the zero catch limit in accordance with the provisions of Article V, para 3 of the ICRW, and are thus not bound by it.
Iceland and Japan both conduct scientific hunts, which are allowed for regardless of Schedule amendments such as the zero catch limit, as stated in Article VIII of the ICRW. As well as allowing for scientific whaling permits to be granted, Article VIII also recognises that as
Traditionally the claim of illegal whaling has been made by both anti-whaling governments and anti-whaling NGOs, but in recent times governments have dropped this rhetoric from their repertoire.
Officials from two of the most fanatical anti-whaling nations, Australia and New Zealand, have been reported as conceeding that, although having explored various options, legal challenges against research whaling would fail.
After the 2006 IWC meeting held in St. Kitts and Nevis, Australian Environment Minister Ian Campbell again conceeded this:
* [June 25 2006] Added Ian Campbell concession
¶ 8:52 AM
A: No, the whaling activities of all three nations are within the rules of the IWC.
The claim of illegality is usually made in reference to the IWC's zero catch limit (moratorium on commercial whaling), which has been in place since 1986.
Norway is the only nation currently conducting commercial whaling. Norway's whaling is legal because Norway lodged an objection to the introduction of the zero catch limit in accordance with the provisions of Article V, para 3 of the ICRW, and are thus not bound by it.
Iceland and Japan both conduct scientific hunts, which are allowed for regardless of Schedule amendments such as the zero catch limit, as stated in Article VIII of the ICRW. As well as allowing for scientific whaling permits to be granted, Article VIII also recognises that as
"continuous collection and analysis of biological data in connection with the operations of factory ships and land stations are indispensable to sound and constructive management of the whale fisheries, the Contracting Governments will take all practicable measures to obtain such data."Thus, not only is scientific whaling legally permitted, it's expressly encouraged by the ICRW. It's remarkable that Japan and Iceland are accused of illegal whaling despite the fact that the convention under which whaling is carried out is so unambiguous on this point.
Traditionally the claim of illegal whaling has been made by both anti-whaling governments and anti-whaling NGOs, but in recent times governments have dropped this rhetoric from their repertoire.
Officials from two of the most fanatical anti-whaling nations, Australia and New Zealand, have been reported as conceeding that, although having explored various options, legal challenges against research whaling would fail.
After the 2006 IWC meeting held in St. Kitts and Nevis, Australian Environment Minister Ian Campbell again conceeded this:
"New Zealand, Australia and the United Kingdom have all looked at legal options and we have all independently come to the same conclusion – at the moment it is not likely to be successful. Indeed it could be counterproductive and may even backfire."
* [June 25 2006] Added Ian Campbell concession
¶ 8:52 AM
