Whaling: Voting, yes or no?

 
A southern right whale Anti-whaling countries are expected to criticise the likes of Iceland and Norway over their continuation of commercial hunting

"It's really quiet this year..."

That's probably the observation I've heard most often so far at this year's International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting.

And it's not a comment on the nature of the Jersey, the hosts - one of the Channel Islands whose precise relationship with the UK would take an entire blog post to set down.

Tranquil it is out there... but it's the unfamiliar tranquility inside the conference hotel that has people talking intensely about what there is to talk about.

Just a few years ago, the twin blocs of countries in favour of and opposed to whaling slung verbal darts at each other all week long with barely a pause for breath.

Much of the vitriol was real, reflecting the deep divide in the world between people who see whales as intrinsically special creatures that should not be harmed under any circumstances, and those for whom whales are wild creatures like any others.

Those vitriolic times did not see any of the deeper issues resolved, however, and so the world of whaling went through two years of attempted peace and reconciliation in which everyone tried to be nice to everyone else in public while making efforts behind the scenes to find common ground.

The substantive part of that didn't work - an issue that I covered last year.

So you might have expected business as usual to be resumed this year, with Japan - traditionally the main target for campaigners' anger - in the sights once more.

Game change

But following the whaling fleet's abrupt exit from the Antarctic last season, and with the nation struggling to rebuild after the devastating earthquake and tsunami in March, no-one knows what its plans are - and given the loss of life, no-one wants to appear harsh with their comments here.

The change in Japanese circumstances and two years of attempting to find a middle way have thrown over the established way of doing things, at least temporarily; and no-one seems entirely sure what the new rules of engagement are.

More on this story

The peace process has gone; but the peace itself remains.

Nevertheless, the substantive divide underneath also remains, with governments entrenched within their own traditional camps.

But any manifestations of that divide, with different blocs proposing changes they think needed, are mostly absent.

In private, delegations are widely reported to be shying away from anything like a vote that could bring divisions out into the open again - abetted, some delegates maintain, by the commission's officers.

It's conceivable that this is having an unexpected, and unwelcome, side effect.

If they want to vote here, governments have to keep their subscription payments up to date.

Whale The meeting is discussing proposals to ensure good practice in the whale-watching industry worldwide

As of the meeting's opening, 22 countries were not up to date. That's about a quarter of the IWC's membership, and a huge increase on previous years.

Why this should be is not clear; but there has to be a chance that some are thinking "well, if I have to pay dues in order to vote, and there aren't going to be any votes, why should I pay?"

If someone does break ranks and call for a vote, the stampede from the main meeting room to the office where the finance officer sits could potentially rival any of the world's great whale migrations.

South Atlantic sanctuary

There are issues on the table that could yet lead bring discordant notes into the current harmony.

Latin American countries may launch a bid to have the South Atlantic Ocean declared a whale sanctuary.

However, Japan is reported to have warned in private that if the Latin Americans go ahead, it will submit a proposal to allow quasi-commercial whaling by some of its coastal communities, which currently operate under regulations permitting hunting for scientific research.

That would set the cat among the pigeons - or, to use a more relevant analogy, the orca among the dolphins.

But I wouldn't bet on it happening.

The pro-peace angle is that it's really hard to make substantive changes to the regulation of whaling because votes on big issues require a three-quarters majority in order to pass, and no-one's likely to get that; so why make waves?

But others are muttering that there's no point in coming to meetings like this unless you do propose the reforms you believe necessary - and force a vote, if necessary, and deal with such fallout as may ensue.

 
Richard Black Article written by Richard Black Richard Black Former environment correspondent

Farewell and thanks for reading

This is my last entry for this page - I'm leaving the BBC to work, initially, on ocean conservation issues.

Read full article

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 13.

    Whaling is not on a par with bear-baiting etc. It has practical applications (ie eating) and is not for entertainment.
    The type of whales hunted by the Japanese are no longer endangered.
    There is no nice way to kill an animal for food, at sea or in the abattoir.
    You can bet if whaling were still profitable, the West would still be at it.

  • rate this
    -2

    Comment number 12.

    Pigs and Cattle are fired at with a piston or electrocuted. Then the main artery in the neck is cut with a knife and the cow or pig is left to die. Any nation which consumes meat shouldn't meddle with any other nation over what can and cannot be eaten.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 11.

    #6.JDM2020

    "Have so called developed and civilised nations not grasped the concept of what an 'endangered species' actually means?"

    It is now a well defined term with legal implications. Given which species are hunted, it is clear from your comment that you don't know what it actually means.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 10.

    Any indigenous arctic whale hunters must then be prevented from whaling, sealing, walrus hunting because as they live in 2011, like us, their ways are 'old ways' which must be abandoned?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 9.

    Good for Japan. They should be allowed to enjoy whatever animal they like.
    They ignore the racist comments towards them about Whale hunting being barbaric. Those hippocrites are just angry aren't westernized like us and just stick to eating farm animals. Eating one animal is no more barbaric than eating another.
    There are more important issues to worry about.

 

Comments 5 of 13

 

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.