RELATED Cetaceans Campaign

<< Back to homepage

Santiago, Chile: EIA director and whaling campaign veteran Jennifer Lonsdale reports.

© Clare Perry/EIA © Claire Bass/EIA

FINAL DAY IWC 60

The final session of the 60th IWC meeting ended early with just a few items left on the agenda. In the afternoon a closed session of the Small Working Group met to work out how to progress further discussion on the future of the IWC.

'Money, money, money'

For once there was little to argue about in the report of the Finance & Administration Committee. France agreed to continue to contribute to the costs of translation of the website into French and Spanish. It was agreed that the Secretariat should negotiate renewal of the lease on its current building based in Cambridge. There was some discussion took place on the budget, the reserve and the contributions by member governments.

The new system for NGO accreditation is to continue as it worked well this year. Fees for NGOs for 2009 will remain at £500 for the first observer and £250 for subsequent observers.

'Date and Venue of the 2009 Meeting'

The 2009 IWC meeting will be hosted by the Government of Portugal in Madeira and a video of the Island was shown. The possibilities for going whale and dolphin watching are very attractive as are the walks into the natural forests of the Islands.

The draft schedule was discussed and EIA was pleased to note that the Working Group on Whale Killing Methods and Associated Welfare Issues, which was shelved this year in order to provide time to discuss the future of the IWC, will meet next year. Addressing the welfare issues associated with cetacean killing is an essential part of the work of the Commission.

'Whaling countries refuse to comment on international trade in whale meat'

A final item was raised by the UK. Iceland and Norway have recently exported whale meat to Japan. All three countries have official reservations to the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) ban on international trade in whale products, which technically means that they can legally trade whale products across their borders. However the resumption of this trade was a provocative act in the light of efforts being made to find a better way of working together on the issues relating to whale conservation and management.

The UK asked Japan, Norway and Iceland if they could provide some information on these exports. Iceland stated that this was not the business of the IWC and Norway and Japan declined to comment.

'Closing Thoughts'

The end of an IWC Annual Meeting is always a moment for reflection. Was it worth the time and effort? Did we contribute to making a difference for the future of whales, dolphins and porpoises? Was it the best use of our supporters’ precious contributions?

The answer to these three questions is YES. EIA played a significant role in communicating its message that commercial lethal exploitation of cetaceans is unnecessary and belongs in the history books. The threats that cetaceans face in their own environment are far to great to justify any continuing threat from the harpoon.

The 60 year old IWC is on a new path to work out its future. It has a vital responsibility in ensuring the survival of cetaceans without commercial exploitation. The International Community must continue to work together to implement comprehensive, multi-disciplinary programmes to study, understand and develop mitigation strategies to ensure the survival of these species and the ecosystems in which they live.

Whale watching, properly managed, is the new commercial use of whales, dolphins and porpoises. It has proved able to provide significant economic benefits to communities, large and small, around the world.

EIA looks forward to continuing its engagement in the work of the IWC and the conservation and protection of all whales, dolphins and porpoises.

EIA would like to extend its thanks to the Government and people of Chile for their hospitality.Whilst we spent much of our time in the meeting room, we enjoyed the few opportunities we had to explore Santiago city.

DAY 5 - Thursday 26th June

The day started with a closed meeting of the Commissioners as they tried to negotiate their way forward on some difficult issues. Back into open session it was a day of wrapping up some outstanding issues and getting onto some democratic decision making.

'Conservation Committee Report Continued'

Discussion on the Report of the Conservation Committee continued with an eloquent and determined presentation by Australian Minister of Environment, Peter Garret, of two papers which strategise Australia’s vision for the future of the IWC and its work in conserving and managing cetaceans in the uncertainties of the 21st Century. IWC/60/15: Conservation Management Plans for Improved Cetacean Management and IWC/60/16: Regional Non-Lethal Research Partnerships: a proposal for the Southern Ocean can both be found on the IWC’s website www.iwcoffice.org under the tab for IWC/60 documents.

These proposals are a fresh approach to addressing the threats to cetaceans through collaborative research on a local, regional and global level and development of species recovery plans. The work would enhance the non-lethal commercial use of cetaceans through whale watching, benefiting small communities around the world.

The plans eliminate the use of lethal research and the work would feed into the IWC’s Conservation and Scientific Committees as well as encourage the development of partnerships between the IWC and other international organisations such as the International Maritime Organisation.

The proposal received very encouraging support from pro-conservation countries but no pro-whaling countries made a comment. EIA fully embraces the proposals from Australia as they articulate the vision that we have promoted for cetacean conservation and the work of the IWC since the beginning of the 1990s when it was clear that the marine environment was under such threat from climate change, ozone depletion, over-fishing, pollution and other human activities. Even then it was clear that these threats are at least as harmful as the harpoon and that resumed hunting of whales may be the last straw for many species.

The Conservation Committee Report was adopted and it was gratifying to see how the work of this Committee is shaping the future of the IWC, integrating work between the Scientific Committee, the Commission and other organisations.

'Greenland's spurious subsistence proposal fails again'

ASW is a category of whaling carried out by communities in the High Arctic that have cultural and subsistence needs for whales, as well as by the people of Bequia in St Vincent and the Grenadines. The Report of the ASW Sub-Committee has been a source of much discussion and there was a palpable stir as the agenda item was opened.

Sweden quite rightly drew attention to the use of the word fishery in the report when referring to whale hunts and asked if this could be changed to hunt or whaling in the future. The use of this word goes back to the beginnings of the IWC when whale hunting was viewed in a similar way to fishing, and is very inappropriate as the management of whales requires a very different approach. In other words – they are simply not fish!

The continued problem of so called inedible stinky gray whales killed in Chukotka was discussed, including what terminology should be used for this alarming problem. The Scientific Committee is charged with coming up with a more appropriate term. Some gray whales and other species taken in Chukotka on the eastern tip of Siberia are found to have a chemical odour and taste which can make people feel unwell when eaten. It is unclear what is causing this problem and what the implications are for these individual animals. The Russian Federation indicated that it may ask for an increase in its quota of gray whales to compensate for the whales taken that are inedible.

The request by Denmark for Greenland to take 10 humpback whales has been the most contentious issue of the meeting. Endless discussion has taken place behind closed doors. The EU IWC members, for the first time being charged with having a common position on key issues, spent hours discussing their position. This was particularly difficult as Denmark is a member of the EU.

The actual needs of the ASW communities in Greenland is unclear as new information, confirmed by representatives from Greenland, shows that consumption of whale meat is not limited to the Inuit communities whose way of life defines the reason why the IWC has this separate category of whaling. The products from the whales are supposed to be consumed only by them. Working out appropriate quotas includes statements on how many whales they need as well as the sustainability of the quota request.

Greenland stated that everyone in Greenland is ‘local’ and that it does not discriminate between the very different types of communities. It was asking for more whales because there has been an overall population increase in Greenland of 10% since the original needs statement was provided to the IWC.

Whale products from ASW are not supposed to be sold commercially however there is a thriving commercial market in Greenland for products from these hunts.

The EU countries, Latin countries and several others argued that Greenland should not be allocated these extra whales and that it should come back to the Commission with a more clearly defined needs statement. Consensus was not possible and Denmark, despite the Chair’s request for no votes during the meeting, forced a vote on the Commission. A ¾ majority of those voting was required to approve the – it failed to attain even a simple majority, with 29 countries in favour, 36 against and 2 abstentions.

EIA believes that it was the correct decision to refuse the quota as some of the hunt is already commercial and therefore there is clearly no subsistence need. Japan and other pro-whaling countries were quick to blame pro-conservation countries for upsetting the new conciliatory process in the IWC, however it should be remembered that it was Denmark & Greenland that forced the vote, and persisted in bringing the proposal to the IWC (it was also rejected last year). Given Japan and its pro-whaling allies blocked the US subsistence quota in 2002 in an attempt to force conservation countries to go along with a commercial coastal whaling quota, their accusations are breathtakingly cynical. Unfortunately some countries, including the US and Switzerland, were prepared to go along with the spurious subsistence quota, presumably either in an effort to maintain the conciliatory process or, in the case of the US, to protect their own subsistence whalers.

'A sanctuary for whales?'

The major focus of discussion was the South Atlantic Whale Sanctuary proposed by Brazil, Argentina and South Africa, supported by numerous other countries. For this to become a sanctuary officially adopted by the IWC, it would require the support of at least ¾ of members voting. Sadly it was clear that this would not be possible as pro-whaling nations continue to oppose the adoption of whale sanctuaries by the IWC.

In the spirit of cooperation, the proposers stated that they would like a discussion on their proposal but would not call for a vote. A film promoting the advantages the Sanctuary would provide was shown. A long debate ensued with strong statements about the benefits sanctuaries offer for the good management and conservation of cetaceans, scientific research and good development of whale watching that provides economic benefits to coastal communities, many of whom are suffering the economic consequences of over- fishing.

'Infractions Committee'

This Committee is a forum for presentation and discussion on infractions of IWC rules, particularly relating to whaling. Concern was raised about 14 whales that have been illegally killed in Korea. Korea responded that its authorities are investigating these matters.

Comment was made on the high levels of bowheads struck and then lost in the Alaskan hunts. These, it seems are exacerbated by changes to sea ice which make hunting more difficult.

'Climate Change and whales'

A last minute item for the day was the pleasing announcement by the convenor of the planned IWC workshop on Climate change that most of the funding for the workshop has now been found so it will go ahead.

DAY 3

The morning began with Japan stating that it would not make a request for a quota of minke whales to be taken by four coastal communities in Japan, in the spirit of cooperation with the Chair's process to discuss the Future of the IWC. It should be noted that numerous countries, including some far less developed than Japan, gave up commercial whaling and their communities have adjusted to new ways of life. A new report by IKAN and WDCS exposes the political nature of this request and the reality any suffering of the four communities results from the competition with the large-scale scientific whaling undertaken by Japan.

'Japan kills more than 10,000 whales for 'research', and concludes that we need to kill more'

We then slipped smoothly into discussion of Special Permits - the issue of so called 'scientific whaling'. Iceland and Norway have carried out Special Permit Whaling in the past - Iceland only a year or so ago - and are now carrying out commercial whaling. Norway has an official objection to the ban but Iceland's is hotly disputed as it did not register an objection at the time of the ban, but left the IWC and rejoined with a 'reservation'. Japan is abusing the Special Permit loophole in the Convention, setting itself catch quotas for minke and fin whales in the Antarctic Whale Sanctuary and sei, Brydes, sperm and minke whales in the North Pacific, taking up to 1,200 - 1,300 great whales each year.

No new permits were considered by the IWC Scientific Committee this year but there is a proposal for a new review process for lethal research that the Scientific Committee supports.

An intense debate followed with numerous countries including the UK stating that Japan's lethal research programme is nothing but commercial whaling in disguise and that the whale meat and blubber is on sale in Japanese markets. It was pointed out that the programme is not providing information that is required for the managements of whales and that research that does not involve the killing of whales is well able to provide required scientific data. Criticism of Japan included pointing out that its programme had not even reached its own original objectives - in other words a bit of a failure that has killed more than 10,000 whales.

At lunch Japan provided a presentation on its research programme - a relief that it didn't take up a large amount of time in the official meeting as it has in the past. The PowerPoint presentations showed drawings of minke whales seemingly squeezed into the Antarctic pack ice because humpbacks are increasing in number. It also expressed concern that the two species are eating the same type of krill - with the inference that killing humpbacks might help the minkes (a few years ago Japan suggested we had to kill the minke whales to save the blue whales). Discussion on the presentation raised the issue that in the natural environment it is normal for a variety of species to eat the same food - there are numerous other species of seals, birds and fish eating this krill - should we wipe them out as well?

'Safety of Vessels at Sea'

Discussion of safety of vessels at sea has taken place in recent years because of the protests in the Southern Ocean against Japan's hunting of whales. Japan again expressed extreme concern about what it sees as violent incidents. Most countries feel that people should have the right to protest but safety must be at the forefront. It was also noted that investigations into the incidents are being carried out by the relevant authorities.

'Environmental threats central to Commission's work'

The threats to cetaceans from the impacts of environmental change including pollution, climate change, ozone depletion, over fishing etc is particularly important to EIA. We worked extremely hard to ensure that it was placed on the agenda of the IWC in the 1990s. Having been described by some as a 'little side show', it has now become a crucial part of the work of the Commission.

EIA sponsored the first ever IWC workshop to look at the impacts of pollutants on cetaceans in 1995. In 1996 we helped fund its first workshop on Climate Change. Later this year a second Workshop on Climate Change will take place in Siena, Italy. A lot of support was expressed by member governments for the success of this vital work and extreme concern was stated about the state of the marine environment as a result of man's activities.

The IWC's work on studying, understanding and working out how to mitigate the threats to cetaceans from environmental change is enough justification in itself for this international convention to have a healthy future.

'Japan blasted for Dall's porpoise hunt'

EIA has played a crucial role in ensuring that the IWC addresses the issue of small whale, dolphin and porpoise (small cetaceans) conservation.

The IWC Scientific Committee carries out remarkable work assessing the status of small cetacean species around the globe and has a treasure trove of information going back over 3 decades.

This year the Committee looked at several South American species and again expressed concern about the criticially endangered Mexican porpoise - the Vaquita - of which there may be only 150 animals left.

Thanks to an informative paper presented to the Scientific Commitee, it expressed its extreme concern about the 15,000 Dall's porpoises being killed every year in Japan's coastal waters and recommended that the hunt be reduced to sustainable levels. It was noted that catch levels do not include the unknown number of porpoises that are killed in fishing nets or struck by the hunters but lost, most likely dying.

Armed with EIA's briefing, very strong statements of concern were made during the debate on this issue, by many countries including UK, Austria, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Belgium, Luxembourg, New Zealand, US, Portugal and Nicaragua. but also by numerous other countries. Japan was asked if it would implement the recommendations of the Scientific Committee but declined to reply. The UK said "The information submitted to the Scientific Committee suggests that the current hunt is indeed highly unsustainable and the outlook for these Dall’s porpoises populations is extremely poor. I sincerely hope that in the new spirit of cooperation in the IWC, Japan will indicate its willingness to embrace the majority view in this Commission that the IWC has the mandate to address all small cetaceans, and act accordingly.

'Conservation Committee report encouraging'

The report of this excellent committee was presented with particular attention being brought to the work being carried out by the Ship Strikes Working Group and championed by Belgium. I attend the meetings of this Working Group on behalf of the UK.

It was noted that ship strikes are a distressing and alarming threat to cetaceans and that the work being done will allow us to understand the extent of the problem, the hotspots and to develop mitigation measures to try to prevent strikes. The IWC is now working with the International Maritime Organisation on the problem.

Several voluntary conservation reports were presented to the Committee that make interesting and encouraging reading.

It should be noted that Japan, Iceland and Norway object to the Conservation Committee. Japan and several other pro-whaling countries including the Caribbeans refuse to participate in its meetings.

'NGOs get to speak'

Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) including EIA are usually not allowed to speak at IWC plenary meetings but this year it was agreed that three speakers from each 'side' of the debate i.e. pro and anti whaling. Six five minute presentations were given at the end of the day which proved very interesting and a long overdue precedent for transparency and engagement of civil society in the IWC.

END OF DAY 2

Our day began with the announcement that Tanzania has joined the IWC as its 81st member. We look forward to its participation in the IWC and hope that it will benefit from the expertise of the IWC in helping it to gain greater protection for whales, dolphins and porpoises in its coastal waters.

The Commissioners spent the first half of the morning in a private session to finalise how the discussions on the Future of the IWC would move forward. A summary document was produced as a guide to this process.

'Habla Espanol?'

Concern was expressed by several delegations at the proposal to make Spanish and French the working languages of the Commission in addition to English which is its official language. Understandably, it was pointed out that for several delegations none of these three are their first language and that they therefore had some concern about the increased costs associated with this arrangement. This is just one issue that faces the Future of the IWC discussions.

A long list of issues has been drawn up that members of the IWC believe should be included in the discussions. A "Small Working Group" has been formed to take these discussions forward. The group comprises 24 members representing the very wide interests within the IWC. We look forward to progress on these discussions and hope that we can move the IWC forward to embrace a new future the IWC and for cetaceans.

'Humpback decision delayed'

The thorny issue of Greenland's request for ten humpback whales has not been settled although we were treated to a lengthy PowerPoint presentation on the hunting in that region. No further plenary discussion will take place until Thursday although no doubt there will be lobbying in the corridors. I did note that whilst the IWC states that the meat from Aboriginal Subsistence hunts is for local consumption by the communities requesting these special quotas, there was an indication that Greenland considers the entire population of this Island to be "local".

A good debate on Whale Watching took place after the presentation of the report of the Scientific Committee on this issue. There is concern that some whale watching operations may disturb whales and have the potential to impact on their ability to feed and breed. The IWC has an important role to play in the assessment of these potential impacts and the development of guidelines for whale watching that could mitigate them.

Whale watching is a vital economic benefit to numerous countries around the world, both developed and developing and even small communities can benefit greatly by carefully 'utilising' their whales for whale watching without harming them. Whales are proving to be far more valuable alive that dead.

'IWC makes progress on bycatch'

The report of the Scoping Group formed to plan a workshop on whale entanglements was presented to the meeting. The original plan for this workshop was to look at best methods for killing whales that could not be released from nets. It was very encouraging to see that the report has expanded the terms of reference for the workshop to include the development of expertise in untangling whales, along with step by step assessment guidelines for deciding if the only solution to end the animals suffering is to euthanize it.

The Scoping Group also noted that this workshop will be a first step in addressing this critical threat to whales and that it is anticipated that further workshops will take place in the future to assess the extent of the problem and look at developing better mitigation and prevention methods.

EIA sees this as a very exciting development with IWC members planning to work cooperatively to find solutions to this very serious issue that threatens several cetacean populations with extinction. It demonstrates the important role that the IWC has in managing and conserving whales above and beyond working out how many can be killed for commercial purposes.

END OF DAY 1

This morning started with the official Opening Ceremony with speeches from the Chilean Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Environment. Starting with a discussion on the agenda, Japan declared that it would not oppose any items even though it did not think (as usual) that several items are within the competence of the IWC. Denmark stated that in the meeting it is representing the interests of Greenlandic and Faroese people but failed to mention the 5 million Danes that seem to have no government representation at the IWC.

'No recovery for blue whales'

The first item was the Scientific Committee's report on the status of whale populations. It was worrying to hear that blue whales, exploited to the verge of extinction by the middle of the 20th century have made little recovery and are still at less than 1% of their original population in the Antarctic. Scientists are still unable to work out how many minke whales are living in the Antarctic and noted alarming environmental changes that could severely affect whales. Meanwhile the most endangered cetacean in the world, the Western Gray Whale numbering only about 100 animals is threatened by seismic development, entanglement in fishing gear and other human induced environmental threats. Even Japan stated that efforts should be made to work together to ensure that the Western Gray Whale does not become extinct as the Chinese River Dolphin or Baiji did last year.

Whale Killing Methods and Associated Welfare Issues was next on the agenda. This year we did not have a meeting of this working group and although some countries submitted data to the Plenary on their whale kills, there was no opportunity to discuss them in detail. EIA was pleased that Lord Rooker made a good intervention on the need for a working group meeting next year and the importance that the UK Government gives to this issue. It was pleasing to see that the UK's leadership on welfare was supported by numerous countries.

We ended a rather short working day with a report on the IWC's cooperation with other organisations and it was particularly noted that the International Maritime Organisation has agreed that the IWC may become an observer to the IMO. Several issues relating to cetacean conservation are relevant to both the IWC and the IMO including ship strikes and entanglements. A collaborative relationship between the two organisations could be very beneficial for the protection of these animals and a step towards the IWC developing into a real 21st century conservation organisation.

'EU common position creates concern'

Our biggest concern currently is the position of European Union countries. The EU has decided that EU members of the IWC should take a common position on certain items on the IWC agenda. Particularly relevant is the decision to be taken on Denmark's request for Greenland to be allowed to take 10 humpback whales in addition to its already excessive hunt of fin, minke and bowhead whales supposedly for subsistence purposes. Hours and hours are being spent by representatives from EU nations in trying to decide a common position. Because Denmark, which represents Greenland, is an EU country, the discussions are not proving simple. Many countries are now looking to see what the EU decision will be on this issue before deciding on their own vote. It is alarming that the fate of these magnificent animals could get lost in the bureaucracy of the EU.

Day 1 ended with a very enjoyable reception at the Chilean Government's Foreign Ministry with IWC delegates entertained with traditional music and dancing. It was moment to relax and enjoy ourselves after a busy day - people from 80 nations mixing together. We were bussed to and from the venue which is always fun as the journey always provides an opportunity to speak to someone new.

Tomorrow the Commissioners will meet in private for a couple of hours and then it is back to business. We wonder just how long this spirit of cooperation and conciliation will last.

DAY 1

Early Monday morning dawns over the Andes and as the city of Santiago, Chile wakes to a new week, a diverse group of people from the far flung corners of the earth are contemplating the first day of the International Whaling Commission's 60th Annual Meeting. Ministers and dignitaries from the Government of Chile will open the proceedings as many of us wonder just how this week will turn out.

I am representing EIA for the 20th time at the IWC's Annual Meeting and also have the privilege to be one of the NGO representatives on the UK Government delegation - sort of campaigner-government hybrid. Lord Rooker is also on the delegation, demonstrating the strong commitment that the UK Government has to the conservation of the world's whales, dolphins and porpoises. I am joined by Allan Thornton and Caroline Pott from our US office. Allan is one the three founders of EIA and attended IWC meetings since the mid 1970s, helping to secure the ban on commercial whaling.

'Secret deliberations'

Two weeks of Scientific Committee meetings and a week of working group meetings have already passed and some people enthusiastically looking forward to being home in a week. But before they go, a lot could happen in this decision making plenary meeting as we discuss how whales, dolphins and porpoises (cetaceans) are managed in the future.

I have been here a week but our deliberations so far are not allowed to be published to the outside world. Our discussions have included ship strikes and whale entanglements; subsistence whaling better known as Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling (ASW) and whale watching. The key focus for this meeting is the Future of the IWC -how it should operate and what it should do in the future.

This 60 year old needs a makeover but not, EIA advocates, at the expense of its biggest success - the international ban on commercial whaling.

'Thorny Issues'

The 60 year old IWC has a remarkable history. Before the ban was implemented in 1986, tens of thousands of great whales were cruelly killed every year. It has rescued many from the brink of extinction and now watching instead of killing whales is the new way for livelihoods to be made out of the wonderful creatures. The IWC boasts a scientific committee second to none and in many areas its work is exemplary. But this week it faces thorny issues.

Denmark has requested that Greenland be granted 10 humpback whales in an addition to the minke, bowhead and fin whales it is already allowed to take. And yet new evidence shows that about 25% of the whale meat from this supposedly subsistence hunt is commercially sold in supermarkets in Greenland and available to everyone in the country including tourists. Europeans are also very concerned as these same whales spend part of their lives in our waters where they are protected.

Japan consistently requests that the IWC grant it a coastal whaling quota under a supposedly new category of whaling called community whaling despite this being a blatant attempt to undermine the commercial whaling ban.

South American countries are requesting the IWC to sanction the formation of a whale sanctuary in the South Atlantic which would help with the development of vital whale watching businesses that provide new opportunities for small communities to make a living from the whales without using the harpoon.

Meanwhile all cetaceans are being impacted by the dramatic changes to their marine environment as a result of threats including climate change, ozone depletion and pollution.

'A Kick in the teeth'

The Chair of the IWC has put great effort into a programme of work to reform the way the IWC works to try to remove the disharmony between those who want whales to be killed and those that don't. He wishes to see a future of much greater collaboration, compromise and consensus. We urge that this is not at the expense of whales. Norway and Iceland, however, have already have spoilt the mood of cooperation by recently exporting whale meat to Japan - a real kick in the teeth to the Chair and those participating in this meeting in good faith.

Meanwhile EIA is providing delegates with briefings on the alarming levels of pollutants found in cetacean products sold in Japan, on Japan's Dall's porpoise hunt - the largest cetacean hunt in the world, and the corporate connections between supermarkets in Europe and the Japanese companies with a long history of whaling.

Please visit this blog for daily updates as the meeting progresses.

< Back