RELATED Cetaceans Campaign

<< Back to homepage

EIA campaigners report on a crucial meeting of the IWC to discuss proposals to resume commercial whaling

LAST DAY

The meeting started with the Conservation Committee report and lots of support expressed for the important work on ship strikes that has been led by Belgium.

The Chair of the Scientific Committee gave its report on small cetaceans and expressed concern for small cetacean populations in north-west Africa, as well as a number of critically endangered species that the sub-committee reviews each year. The Scientific Committee report and its recommendations were adopted by the Commission, including proposals for a project to ascertain Franciscana dolphin abundance and bycatch levels. EIA would like to commend Italy and France for their contribution to the IWC’s small cetacean and conservation work.

Most of the day was spent discussing Denmark’s proposal (on behalf of Greenland) for a quota of humpback whales in 2010, 2011 and 2012. Spain on behalf of the EU brought a compromise proposal to the table, which reduced the catch quota of fin whales by 9 individuals to 10 each year. At the same time, the humpback whale quota would be 9 individuals. Greenland then suggested that the fin whale quota would be set at 16, but in a footnote to the schedule Greenland would agree to voluntarily reduce the catch limit to 10 whales.

At this point, there was a heated discussion of the proposal, with Latin American countries strongly opposing the proposal on a number of grounds, including a lack of a needs statement, ad hoc scientific advice and the fact that there was no consultation with range states. Monaco and Australia added their voices to those calling on Denmark to withdraw the proposal. After a great deal of discussion and several pauses for private consultation, there was agreement that the proposal could be adopted by consensus with those countries against not blocking the consensus. In return Denmark agreed to consult range states when the proposals are up for renewal in 2012, and to reconsider the needs statement.

After a late lunch, Finance and Administrative issues were considered. It was decided that the IWC would need annual meetings to continue for 2011 and 2012, but there is strong support for such as whether to have annual or biennial meetings in the future.

The Chair of the meeting proposed a way forward for Commissioners to consider in the period between now and next year's meeting. The approach sugggested is aimed at maintaining a constructive approach, with discussion of controversial elements kept to a minimum while progress is made on initiatives which are important but have not received general support. In this latter group of issue he included the workshop on efforts to prevent entanglement, broadening cooperation in scientific research and taking forward discussions on capacity building in developing countries. Since there was no time for Commissioners to agree specific text on the way forward, it was agreed to note the document as recommendations from the Chair. So we have a 'cooling off' period until the next meeting, with no intersessional meetings, but no one really knows what will happen next year (or in fact where the meeting will be).

Finally the meeting said farewell to Nicky Grandy, the present Secretary to the Commission, who is leaving after 10 years. Nicky has been unfailingly courteous, hard working and fair minded in her difficult role in the IWC. EIA will miss her and wishes her the very best in her future work.

IWC press releases with more details of the meeting can be accessed from the website

http://www.iwcoffice.co.uk/_documents/commission/IWC62docs/pressrelease230610.pdf

Final result - Thursday

There was a tense start to the day as the US had submitted a proposal to allow indigenous whaling quotas for 7 years which angered many countries as it was seen as a surprise, and various procedural issues were discussed with some heat, such as the fact that the US was proposing to discuss the subsistence whaling quota under the Future of the IWC agenda item, that had only been kept open to discuss the way forward in the context of a cooling off period.

The Commission addressed other issues while consultation took place outside the meeting, including special permits, RMP, environmental concerns,

There was a good discussion about environmental issues impacting whales, particularly in light of the recent disastrous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The US proposed a workshop to focus on human-caused impacts on whales in the Arctic, given that an oil spill in this region would wreak havoc on the environmental and be almost impossible to clean up. The workshop got wide ranging support, including from Russian Federation, Finland, Sweden and other Arctic countries, while some governments wished to expand the focus to other areas.

EIA was pleased that health issues were raised by Switzerland, speaking for the first time in the plenary session. EIA along with nine other NGOs had provided a briefing on the issue of human health impacts from the consumption of cetacean products, providing data and information of the negative impacts that have been recorded in Arctic areas and Japan. Many member governments spoke in support of increased attention to human health effects of the consumption of cetacean products, and improved cooperation with the World Health Organisation, including Mexico, Monaco, Netherlands, Hungary, Australia, Austria, Finland, Costa Rica, Czech Republic and Germany. The Czech Commissioner suggested creating a working group or workshop on the issue, and encouraged whaling countries to communicate more information to their public.

The Secretariat in response confirmed that there has been no interaction between the IWC and WHO since the last meeting, despite previous Resolutions requesting this action. Norway and Japan emphasised that not all cetaceans were polluted and that some fish had higher levels of pollution. Japan said that it had strengthened food safety regulations in light of a series of food safety incidents and that in terms of whale meat and information is available, particularly in terms of scientific whaling. With respect to small cetaceans, Japan’s health ministry had issued instruction for consumption of products and the government was taking extensive measures.

Germany reported on conservation management plans, including the ground breaking conservation plan for Western North Pacific grey whales, undertaken by IWC and IUCN.

St Kitts and Nevis expressed its concern about the expansion of conservation work by the IWC and the fact that small cetaceans were being raised. Switzerland, with support from Ireland, raised the issue of small cetaceans, noting that their conservation is in a dire situation and that the IWC was the best place to address small cetaceans. Belgium’s paper on a way forward to address small cetaceans has garnered a lot of support.
Whale watching was also discussed, with lots of support from South American countries and elsewhere.

Eventually the Commission returned to the issue of the US/Denmark proposal on subsistence whaling quotas. Greenland made a long presentation (similar to previous presentations) about their request for a humpback whale proposal. This was followed by increasingly heated debate about the US/Denmark proposal and if it should be allowed to be presented. After an impassioned plea from the US commissioner, the Chair advised that the US could introduce their proposal but there would be no discussion. The US was very candid in their presentation, saying that the aboriginal whaling quotas had been used in the past as a political bargaining chip, and would be used again in the future. The Commissioner also stated that it was unfair that subsistence whaling hunts were the only ones that were managed by the IWC.

This was followed by a number of NGO presentations, which resulted in Norway holding open the welfare agenda item in order to respond to allegations by two Norwegian groups that had filmed a Norwegian minke whale hunt.


Here is the intervention that EIA should have been able to present to the IWC this evening, but was unable to because NGOs have been so limited in the interventions they are allowed. Because of this, only five NGOs were able to speak. Unfortunately, small cetaceans are not a priority issue for many NGOs. This is what we would have said


The Environmental Investigation Agency would first like to thank Nicky Grandy for the great work she and her team have done since she took on the role of Secretary, and wish her the very best in her future work.

EIA and many other NGOs are extremely concerned about small cetaceans. The vast majority of cetacean species ARE small cetaceans, and yet discussion of their status and efforts on their behalf during the "future of the IWC" process have been almost entirely absent.

Small cetaceans have been part of the IWC since the Small Cetacean Subcommittee was formed in 1974. Since then, its global network of scientists has reviewed every small cetacean species in every part of the world, and represents the definitive body of expertise on these species.

The Commission has passed numerous resolutions on small cetaceans, starting in 1977 with a request for data on catches of dolphins and small whales. Yet today, the world's largest cetacean hunt is almost forgotten. Some 15,000 Dall’s porpoises are killed in Japan each year, along with more than 2,000 dolphins and small whales. Direct hunts of small cetaceans also take place in many other parts of the world. Many of of these hunts supply food for people – and since small cetaceans almost always contain high levels of mercury, PCBs and other toxins – they are an acute risk to human health. The IWC should address this issue without delay.

Hundreds of thousands of small cetaceans also die each year from by-catch and other man-made threats, and some species and populations are quietly disappearing. Given the recent extinction of the Baiji, we all know this to be true. We also know that the recommendations of the Scientific Committee have been critical in saving the vaquita, so far, from the same fate.

While management advice from the Commission on small cetaceans is rejected by some, the IWC is the primary international body that can ensure that other small cetaceans do not join the Baiji on the list of species that are forever lost.

We do not agree with the 2009 Small Working Group report which suggested that the status quo on small cetaceans might be sufficient to avoid the need for further action. It is not. It is unacceptable that, despite being a ‘Category A’ or priority issue, small cetaceans were not mentioned in the fundamental elements of the proposed consensus decision, and received only a brief mention in the future work plan.

Most of the 300,000 cetaceans killed in fishing gear each year are small cetaceans. Addressing just a fraction of these catches would save thousands more cetaceans than any other IWC activity.

It is therefore essential that these species are not ignored, and that IWC efforts to accommodate whaling nations do not come at the expense of small cetaceans. Instead, discussions on the IWC’s Future should be guided and inspired by its remarkable record and the prospects for success.

We therefore ask that the IWC use any future discussions to advance conservation measures for all cetaceans, and ensure that small cetaceans are no longer neglected as it seeks to solve other issues, 'intractable' or otherwise.

We also urge all countries to participate in the Small Cetacean Subcommittee as well as the Conservation Committee. This is not a concession, it is a duty that comes with being part of this organisation, and it will help the IWC restore its relevance and credibility as an effective conservation and management body, which, according to the Chair’s opening address to this meeting, is our common goal.



Wednesday 23rd June
After a day and a half of closed-door discussions amongst various groups of IWC members, the full plenary meeting resumed this morning.

The Chairman explained that there had been 30 meetings between the various groups but major issues remain upon which there is no agreement. These include the continuation of the moratorium, whale sanctuaries, whaling in sanctuaries, special permit whaling, whaling by objection or reservation, and international trade in whale products. He therefore thought that a “cooling off” period of probably a year would be a good idea so that members of the IWC can have a think about how to approach these and other issues relating to whale management and conservation.

The result is that, unless anything changes by Friday, IWC endorsed catch limits for commercial whaling by Iceland, Norway and Japan have not been agreed. This is a victory for whales and the ban on commercial whaling. No doubt these three countries will carry on whaling using loopholes in the IWC Convention but they will remain renegades rather than be legitimised by the IWC.

Many member countries of the IWC are determined that its focus must be the development of collaborative work to effectively address the conservation and welfare implications of threats to whales, dolphins and porpoises (cetaceans) including entanglement, ship strikes, climate change and pollution. The Australian Minister of the Environment, Peter Garrett, has been working hard at the meeting this week to promote Australian led initiatives on these issues. Not only has Australia mapped out various programmes of work but it has committed significant funding to them.

Whale Killing Methods and Associated Welfare Issues was a positive focus of the afternoon with the presentation of the report of an excellent Workshop on Entanglement of Whales. This collaborative venture between Norway, Australia and the US exposes this threat to both endangered and more plentiful whale populations and the suffering that entanglement can cause. Whales caught in nets can suffer for months before dying and the IWC has a critical role in finding a solution to this serious welfare issue. Also under the same agenda item, the UK announced that it will be hosting a Workshop on Animal Welfare and Ethics in the coming months. It will seek to address and objectively evaluate fundamental questions and differences of opinion on the issues relating to the humane management of whales. Good support was given to the announcement and EIA looks forward to contributing to the workshop’s development.

NGO interventions were planned for the end of day, but postponed. The IWC is decades behind other multilateral environmental agreements in terms of civil society participation. Conservation NGOs have just 15 minutes to speak to issues of concern to literally millions of their supporters. The presentations are now planned for the end of business on Thursday, but we are already very behind on other agenda items. At this rate its likely we will be speaking to the IWC when most of the Commissioners have already gone home….


21st June
Frustration today as the first day of the meeting finished mid-morning and countries went into closed negotiations which are due to last until Wednesday morning.

This, combined with the fact that NGOs have just 15 minutes to speak on Wednesday afternoon, has left us feeling angry and frustrated at the lack of civil participation in this forum. The 15 minutes we are allotted has to be split between all 'antiwhaling' NGOs, although it is clear that not all NGOs are as anti-whaling as others (for example, see http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/21/greenpeace-backs-commercial-whaling-ban). The IWC is decades behind all other MEAs that allow NGOs to make interventions on specific agenda items.

Meanwhile, all the important work being carried out by the Commission and Scientific Committee will be squeezed into a few days, leaving very little time to discuss bycatch, pollution, climate change, human health issues, welfare and other issues related to cetaceans and their environment. Only time will tell, but since there has been no progress in the last two years of negotiations, it seems unlikely that 2 days will make a difference.




20th JuneWelcome to EIA’s blog on the 62nd Annual Meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC).

We arrived in Agadir on the 14th June for meetings of the IWC’s Conservation Committee and the ‘Future of the IWC’ to discuss the Chair and Vice-Chair’s ‘proposed consensus decision to improve the conservation of whales’. The proceedings of these meetings, along with the report of the Scientific Committee which met for two weeks preceding the working groups, are confidential until Monday 21st June.

EIA campaigners have been taking part in the meetings this week, EIA’s Director Jennifer Lonsdale as a member of the UK Delegation. We are reinforced this week by the arrival of our Chairman, Allan Thornton and US senior campaigner Sam Labudde.

This meeting is critical for the future of the world’s whales. While the proposed consensus decision has many positive aspects, it has been conceived to appease three developed countries that have continued to carry out whaling despite the moratorium since 1986. The proposal legitimises and endorses these whaling activities, while doing nothing to ensure that they are phased out in the longer term. Although the catch levels proposed are lower for Japan, they are higher for Iceland and Norway, considerably higher with respect to Iceland. This would create an unacceptable expansion of whaling in Europe. Despite this, the proposal is gaining support by some countries, including the US, New Zealand, Denmark and Sweden.

EIA is advocating a twin track process, which gives equal weight and importance to expanding and financing the important conservation-related work that is already carried out under the auspices of the IWC, as well as addressing commercial whaling. We will report back to this blog as often as we can in the coming week.

Clare Perry, Senior Campaigner

FILE DOWNLOADS

EIA Position Statement IWC62 PDF File [48.97 K]   DOWNLOAD

< Back