Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 3 • Number 12 • 30th June 2003
Whaling Commission More Split than Ever
Whaling Commission More Split than Ever
On 19 June the annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) ended in Berlin and left the 51 members in deep disagreement over the objectives of the Commission. During the one-week long conference member countries discussed proposals on whale sanctuaries, whaling quotas and a conservation committee.
No Go For Whale Sanctuaries Or For New Quotas
Australia and New Zealand proposed, for the fourth time, to establish a whale sanctuary in the South Pacific. For the fourth time the proposal failed to gain the necessary three-quarters majority by a vote of 24 to 17 (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 13 June 2002). The proposal from Argentina and Brazil to establish a whale sanctuary in the South Atlantic suffered the same fate and was defeated by the same vote. The Japanese put forward two proposals to increase their whaling quota. One proposal was for another 150 minke whales, the other for 150 Bryde’s whales. Both proposals were supposed to increase the quota for the coastal fishing communities in Japan. However, both proposals were turned down.
The voting on the four proposals was representative of the political split within the IWC. Regarding the whale sanctuaries, the pro-whaling nations headed by Japan, Norway and Iceland argued that whale populations were abundant and therefore there was no need for sanctuaries. At the same time the anti-whaling nations, headed by the US and European countries, led the opposition against the Japanese proposals. Japan reacted angrily to the rejection of its proposals, arguing that the US had received a quota for its fishing communities at an IWC meeting last year (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 24 October 2002) and was thus unreasonably taking a strong position against the Japanese proposal.
A Go Ahead For The Conservation Committee
Despite the traditional disagreements on whaling quotas and the dominance of arguing over old disputes, IWC members agreed to establish a conservation committee by simple majority vote. The conservation committee will address, inter alia, the impact of marine pollution, climate change, and bycatch in fishing nets. The establishment of the committee was seen as a major breakthrough for the anti-whaling nations as well as for the conservation community. A representative from the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) said “Campaigners fighting for the survival of whales and dolphins around the world will remember Berlin 2003 as a historic turning point”.
For the pro-whaling nations the establishment of the committee marks a major setback, which they did not accept quietly. On the last day of the meeting the group of pro-whaling countries, which consists of 17 countries headed by Japan, Norway and Iceland, delivered a letter to the commission expressing their deep concern over the latest developments, in particular the establishment of the conservation committee, and threatened to leave the Commission and look into alternative bodies to regulate the sustainable use of abundant whale resources. The letter furthermore stated that the Berlin Initiative was “an attempt to change the fundamental objectives and subvert the purpose” of the IWC.
The IWC will meet again in June next year in Sorrento, Italy.
“Whales Win No Sanctuary From Acrimonious Commission,” ENS, 19 June 2003; “End in Sight for the IWC” High North News, 19 June 2003.
ICTSD Internal Files