IWC 2009 - whale conservation bloc not playing its hand
Guest blog from Sara Holden, our International whales campaign coordinator
Just a few minutes before the opening of the 61st International Whaling Commission meeting, a large rat was seen scuttling through the hotel and out the door. As metaphors go, it was a good one. The IWC meeting venue is another. Hosted at a casino hotel in Madeira, Portugal, it is fast becoming apparent that anyone betting on a good outcome for the whales is unlikely to win.
After 12 months of talking and achieving nothing of substance, the smart money says another 12 months of talking is the only thing on the cards.
At the opening of the meeting, the organisers of the IWC announced that they hoped there would be no voting, no surprises and that resolutions that might only pass by a small majority should not be encouraged.
What is most shocking is not the vast amount of time, money, carbon spent bringing everyone together in order to not vote, but there isn’t a small majority at the IWC this year. In some years the balance of power rests on a knife edge between those who want to take the IWC into the 21st century, stop whaling and address the modern threats to whales and those who want to maintain a 19th century outlook and continue to hunt whales.
But this year the numbers are in our favour – roughly a 60/40 split.
So, with the odds stacked in their favour you would imagine the whale warriors of Europe, the Americas and Australasia, armed with their mandate to protect the whales would rise up, charge forward and ensure that votes are cast for the protection of whales
None has.
They will all say that politics is more complicated than that and diplomacy is a careful art in order to get what you want. But I would willingly bet if the pro whaling faction had the majority they would be using it to ram through all kinds of reforms to reach their aim of hunting whales.
So instead, here we sit – on a dormant volcano –in the sure knowledge that nothing will happen.
The head on the IWC – Bill Hogarth – is retiring this year. He has told the Commission that the achievement of which he is most proud is that the delegates are now talking nicely with each other. Yesterday he asked if delegates would write a message on an IWC flag for him to take as a memento – I leave it up to you to suggest a message...
Follow Greenpeace »
Comments
★☆★ LOVE GREENPEACE AND ALL THE WHALES IN THE WORLD...★☆★
"Surfing Delight in California"
SEE YOU SOON ON MY WAVE http://www.beachcitysurf.com/
Posted by: BEACHCITYSURF | June 24, 2009 10:58 AM
★☆★ LOVE GREENPEACE AND ALL THE WHALES IN THE WORLD...★☆★
"Surfing Delight in California"
SEE YOU SOON ON MY WAVE
Posted by: BEACHCITYSURF | June 24, 2009 10:59 AM
Hi Jo, ...Sara,
...and thank you for yet another memorable accounting of what it's like to be musing sitting on a volcano. I don't have a message to suggest, but I do have a movie for you to view if you so desire. 'Whaledreamers', with some nice footage and mention of Greenpeace in it. Enjoy it, ...and I've just raised the embedded HD video bar for you videographers out there - http://www.gratefulchild.org/projects/gcweb/gc/html/movies/Whaledreamers.html
Posted by: Grateful Child | June 24, 2009 2:18 PM
Why don't we just sink the whale-killer ships? Dynamite'em, torpedo'em, blow'em...you decide! I pull the trigger for you if want...Sink these coward-bastards!
Posted by: BlackPeace | June 24, 2009 7:57 PM
Interesting that this article is asking for the rule of law to operate to protect the whales when the Greenfreak organization is more than willing to act the terrorist/pirate at worst, or the vigilante at best (with a ship and outboard boats to disable the steering and power to Japanese whaling ships.) If Greenpeace actually had police powers granted to it by a government agency from some country or international organization, as does the ASPCA where animal cruelty cases are involved, then arresting whalers and impounding their ships would be appropriate.
You guys have to know that disabling a ship in waters as hazardous as those near Anticartica poses life-thretening risks to the crews. You have apparently decided that whaling is a capital crime and that your good intentions on the matter gives you the right to adjudicate and execute the capital punishment on the ship's crew.
The IWC may not favor your perspectives, but whaling has been going on longer than you've been alive. It's hard to pass up 40 tons of meat at a single thrust, especially when there's not a lot of land in your country on which to grow fat livestock.
Meat has been part of a well balanced diet for all of human history and I'll agree that hunting an animal to extinction isn't a wise thing to do, a few whales every year die of natural causes like orcas killing them for the pleasure of the hunt as I saw not all that long ago on one of the Natgeo specials. Human hunting of all game animals (such as whales,) if controlled a bit, should allow both the whales to survive and the Japanese to have food on the table. The all-or-nothing ban proposal you're suggesting seems a bit long on emotion and short on facts of nature.
Posted by: Wolfgang von Neumann | June 24, 2009 9:50 PM
Duh, voting is pointless unless you have 75%. Unless Greenpeace likes to see politicians granstanding for your applause theres no need for it
Posted by: timmy | June 25, 2009 1:58 AM
@blackpeace:
Very reasonable comment, but I think you are mixing up greenpeace with the sea shepherds.
Your last paragraph is absolutely true. If humankind would have started taking reasonable amounts of whales (and fish) long time ago, we would not need the total ban.
However many populations are near their tipping point, from which they cannot recover. Secondly humnakind is not consuming whale meat anymore, because they are not dependend on it (its different for fish). whaling is hugely subsidized.
times are changing, so we should not hang on to traditions.
Posted by: Fred | June 29, 2009 2:34 PM