Catching whales for science is a hoax
The Fisheries Agency of Japan (FAJ) and the Institute of Cetacean Research (ICR) make more frequent defences of their research than usual - probably feeling the pressure. Here is an analysis of the failed research by our whales specialist John Frizell.
By John Frizell
In 1987, the ban on commercial whaling came into force for Japan. Yet despite the ban the whaling fleet which had previously conducted the commercial hunt sailed at its usual time to the same whaling grounds in the Antarctic to take the same species of whale they had caught the year before and return them to Japan boxed in 15 kg cardboard cartons, ready for sale. This was made possible by ‘scientific’ whaling.
When the last remaining high seas commercial whaling company in Japan was dissolved in 1987, it gave its factory ship and catchers to a new company whose shareholders were all companies formerly involved in whaling. In the same year a non profit organisation called the Institute for Cetacean Research (ICR) was founded. The new company that now owned the whaling fleet donated nine million US dollars to the ICR. The ICR promptly chartered the whaling fleet from the new company and set off for the Antarctic using the factory ship, catchers and crew from the commercial hunt to catch whales in the name of science.
So what about the science?
When the program began with a two year ‘feasibility study’, it had two objectives: estimation of biological parameters to improve stock management and elucidation of the role of whales in the Antarctic marine ecosystem. [‘Improve stock management’ means to find ways to increase the annual catch of whales without increasing the risk of depleting the population.] Their objective was to determine age specific mortality – like the actuarial tables for humans that can tell you the expected remaining lifespan of a 45 year old person. After a few years they realised that this was too difficult an objective and revised it to determining the natural mortality rate instead.
The first ‘scientific’ whaling program, called JARPA, spent 18 years and killed 6,778 minke whales attempting to determine the natural mortality rate, M. In 2006 an expert workshop of scientists from the International Whaling Commission, meeting in Tokyo, agreed (including the Japanese scientists) that the natural mortality rate was not determined - the confidence limits around estimates of M from JARPA data were so wide that M remains effectively unknown. These were so wide that even a value of M=0 was not excluded. In other words, 18 years of lethal ‘research’ had been unable to exclude the possibility that minke whales might be immortal! And although lots of data were collected in attempts to try and understand the role of whales in the Antarctic marine ecosystem the report of the workshop notes that "relatively little progress has been made in addressing this objective" and this objective remains unreached.
Two more objectives were added in 1995 and 1996 but they were not reached either. But
despite the failure of this huge program to reach a single one of its objectives, the ICR has
moved on to a second program, JARPAII, which will kill even more whales. They did this
before the workshop to review the first program had taken place. So what will be the role of
lethal science in the new program and what could be done by non lethal methods instead?
According to the government of Japan, the new ‘research’ will be aimed at:
1. Monitoring whale abundance trends and biological parameters such as pregnancy rate and age at maturity.
2. Monitoring prey consumption and the change in blubber thickness.
3. Monitoring the effects of contaminants on cetaceans
4. Monitoring cetacean habitat such as changes in water temperature, salinity and ice.
5. Resolving population structure
6. Improving management.
But what does this really mean, how can it be done and what will we learn?
Monitoring whale abundance is easy in principle – you count the whales. But in practice it is harder than it seems. When the 18 years of data from the first JARPA were analysed by the expert workshop, its conclusion was that the data were ‘consistent with a substantial decline, a substantial increase, or approximate stability in minke whale abundance in these geographic areas over the period of JARPA.’ In other words nothing had been learned. Age at maturity requires killing the whale to examine growth rings in its earplugs (a bit like the growth rings in trees), but nothing has been learned from 18 years of this, it seems unlikely that anything will be learned, and in any case the answers this ‘research’ seeks to provide are not needed Pregnancy rates could, in theory, be monitored from biopsy samples but this would simply tell us what we already know - most mature female minkes are pregnant, something we already know from the past ‘research’.
Monitoring prey consumption and the change in blubber thickness involve killing the whale and weighing its stomach contents. Data from the 8000 plus minkes killed so far in JARPA and JARPA II has determined that they eat krill and only krill. Information about a whales diet can also be determined by collecting whale faeces for analysis. Blubber thickness can tell us about the whale’s condition; this can also be determined by firing a biopsy dart into the whale. Biopsy darts remove a bit of tissue but do not kill or injure the whale.
The objective of measuring the levels of contaminants in whales has been carefully designed to require killing the whale. Investigators will look at levels of heavy metals in internal organs such as kidney and liver and there is no way to get these without killing the whale. But the contaminants that are likely to have most effect on the whales, the organochlorines, are fat soluble and so could be sampled by biopsy dart. There is already a lot of information on heavy metals in whales from the past program and it is difficult to see what use there is in collecting more. But if more were needed it could be obtained by taking samples from southern hemisphere whales killed by accident, particularly those hit by ships, and strandings, or by studying the thousands of samples already taken but not analysed.
Monitoring the cetacean habitat, by measuring changes in water temperature, salinity and ice is completely non lethal.
Just as humans group into tribes and nations, whales group into sub populations with different characteristics. For example one sub population of humpbacks will go to one area to give birth and mate, another sub population will go to a different area. There are genetic differences between these sub populations and so population structure can most easily be determined from DNA analysis. DNA samples can be obtained by biopsy darts but the JARPA ‘researchers’ claim it is too difficult to biopsy whales in the Antarctic. They also point out that killing the whale allows its meat to be sold on the market, thus defraying the cost of the ‘research’ whereas there is no financial return from a biopsy. If we wanted to resolve population structure it could be done entirely from DNA analysis without killing a single whale.
The objective of ‘improving management’ is the big lie in a program founded on lies because ‘improved management’ simply means bigger commercial quotas. The architects of JARPA II are clear about this. They complain that the current rules of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), which would govern commercial whaling if it were allowed to restart, are ‘overly concerned with the protection of whale stocks’ and it is a primary objective of JARPA II to find evidence that would allow those rules to be relaxed. But the Southern Ocean was made a whale sanctuary by the IWC in 1994 with only Japan voting no. So Japan’s ‘researchers’ are gathering data to facilitate increased commercial quotas in an area that is off limits to commercial whaling. Although Japan exempted itself from the ban on commercial hunting of minkes within the sanctuary area it accepted that the sanctuary applies to fin and humpback whales.
Whale scientists all over the world study whales without killing or injuring them. The JARPA ‘researchers’ insist on using lethal methods not because they are necessary but because they supply whale meat to the markets in Japan and offer an opportunity to train new crew, thus keeping the whaling industry alive.
A table. The first column is verbatim from the whalers say; the second column shows what could be done with non lethal methods.
| ITEM | LETHAL | NON LETHAL |
| Body length | Take actual measurements | Take photos and measure photos |
| Body weight | Weigh body | Calculate from length |
| Age | Collect teeth, earplugs, baleen plates | Estimate from length and sex |
| Growth | Measure body length and determine age | Observe same whale over several years |
| Maturation | Examine reproductive glands | Observe same whale over several years |
| Fertilisation | Examine reproductive glands | No non lethal method but can observe when calf is born |
| Breeding season | Deduce from feotus | Observe on breeding grounds |
| Pregnancy | Feotus present | Biopsy hormone analysis |
| Lactation | Examine Mammary gland | Observe mother calf pairs |
| Breeding cycle | Determine from pregnancy rate and other data | Observe whales on breeding grounds |
| Diet | Examin stomach contents | Faeces collection biopsy |
| Tracking | Internal tags recovered when whale is killed | Photo ID satallite tags |
| Stock structure | Sample tissues from dead whales | Biopsy from live whales |
Non lethal methods have huge advantages over lethal ones because they permit repeated observations of the same individual. Lethal methods, by their nature, offer only a snapshot. Once a whale is ‘observed’ , it cannot be observed again later. This makes lethal methods particularly unsuitable for the studies of whale behaviour, such as migration, which are of great interest to scientists.
Comments
You guys and gals are so wonderful and brave and I hope and pray for your safe journey and success in your efforts to protect our oceans most treasured creatures. I am so ashamed of the Japanese - this is so dishonorable from a race who prides themselves on honour.
I have prayed to God to make the whales invisible to the Japs, so that they cant find any to kill. If its in his will thats what will be.
Good luck
Kind regards and thanks for all you do,
Caroline
Posted by: Caroline | November 19, 2007 7:49 AM
Hi, just to let you know that I'm sat here near gateshead thinking about you all. I know that your very prescence there will mean that at least the worlds media will get to see this sham, I just wish it was possible to not buy anything Japanese ever again, I'll certainly be making more of an effort to do so. In the meantime good luck, stay safe, and I will do my bit and talk about your efforts at every opportunity.
Posted by: Alan Clark | November 19, 2007 8:02 AM
But we all know that the whole point of whaling is to catch them for food. Greenpeace says the research is a sham, others apparently say otherwise, at the end of the day the whaling people of the world are still going to want to kill them for food, even if they can get information about them via non-lethal means. So this whole debate seems a little bit mute... Don't we need to come up with some reasons for people to stop wanting to eat whale meat? We need some fast too cos it looks like the icelanders are keen to open the international trade in the meat up again. Honestly I'm not too sure why killing cows is bad when it's ok to kill whales for food.
Posted by: timmy | November 19, 2007 8:46 AM
I think Mr. Fritzell forgot to mention that the Japanese programmes also include non lethal methods such as biopsy and observation. That's why there are two ships which are not whalers.
Besides, is there anybody collecting faeces from 935 minke whales in the Antarctic every year? Sounds like a funny thing to do. Maybe Greenpeace should do that while they accompany the Japanese whaling fleet.
The non lethal methods, even though they allow one to observe the same animal over years, are not as accurate as the lethal ones.
Posted by: isanatori | November 19, 2007 9:30 AM
"The non lethal methods, even though they allow one to observe the same animal over years, are not as accurate as the lethal ones."
- I refer you this quote, above:
"The first ‘scientific’ whaling program, called JARPA, spent 18 years and killed 6,778 minke whales attempting to determine the natural mortality rate, M. In 2006 an expert workshop of scientists from the International Whaling Commission, meeting in Tokyo, agreed (including the Japanese scientists) that the natural mortality rate was not determined - the confidence limits around estimates of M from JARPA data were so wide that M remains effectively unknown. These were so wide that even a value of M=0 was not excluded. In other words, 18 years of lethal ‘research’ had been unable to exclude the possibility that minke whales might be immortal!"
Hard to believe that lethal methods can "accurate" when they're not even conclusive!
Posted by: Dave | November 19, 2007 10:44 AM
I was expecting to see thousands of comments of support here from around the world. Feel compelled to add mine as so many of these comments are from a critic. We know you are doing a valuable job. Thankyou.
Posted by: tamlyn | November 19, 2007 11:08 AM
The ocean meets the sky
with true abuandance
Tagging Hump Back Whales thats Science mate
Not using your sophistcated harpoon guns
And slaughtering them to serve up on some plate
Japan breeds whalers
Who know nothing of the pain
The World at large feels when the harpoon bites
The ocean meets the sky
Don't let the Hump Backs die
One of the oceans really splendid sights
Posted by: rex tyler | November 19, 2007 1:10 PM
The ocean meets the sky
with true abuandance
Tagging Hump Back Whales thats Science mate
Not using your sophistcated harpoon guns
And slaughtering them to serve up on some plate
Japan breeds whalers
Who know nothing of the pain
The World at large feels when the harpoon bites
The ocean meets the sky
Don't let the Hump Backs die
One of the oceans really splendid sights
Posted by: rex tyler | November 19, 2007 1:10 PM
"I think Mr. Fritzell forgot to mention that the Japanese programmes also include non lethal methods such as biopsy and observation. That's why there are two ships which are not whalers."
Excellent point and I wish I could say welcome back Insane-a-story. Now just keep those two ships there and send those that thirst for blood home. ...and who do you think you are trying to pull the wool over the eyes of? You're scientific research only serves your own monetary purpose of slaughtering greater numbers of these innocent and peaceful creatures, and to justify your horrendous acts of violence. Just go home where you belong and give these brave guys and gals on the Espy a break this year. It's cold down there, ...GC
Posted by: Grateful Child | November 19, 2007 2:02 PM
there is no justification for killing whales;scientific or not.What these japs are doing is for food and not exactly research.and Mr.lethal Isanatori what are you going to learn from a dead whale anyway.the dead never speaks remember
Posted by: jener | November 19, 2007 2:47 PM
There are a bunch of statements in this article appearing as facts -- but no sources given. In my book, an undocumentet fact is considered propaganda. Could someone please put some actual facts and figures behind these "cases"?
Posted by: Francis | November 19, 2007 4:15 PM
HELLO!
"The non lethal methods, even though they allow one to observe the same animal over years, are not as accurate as the lethal ones."
Should i just kill you to see get some "accurate" data about ur mortality rate, ur waist circumference and ur feeding patterns. Please!
To the crew: you guys rock! Our hearts are with you, plese dont give up. Not many pple have seen the whales and a whole ignorant pile of pple in this sad earth will never understand the beauty of them being free and safe in their ocean.
We are not perfect, yes we eat beef and chicken but the least we can do is to start off somewhere. Thank you for making the difference guys!
Posted by: Kris | November 19, 2007 4:17 PM
If we used "science" on mountain gorillas the same way Japan wants to use it on the whales, they'd be extinct by now. Killing in the name of science hasn't been in style since British imperialism stopped.
Greenpeace, good job! Where are the action alerts for us to protest?
Posted by: Brad | November 19, 2007 6:15 PM
I can't believe this still happens. Thank you all for doing such a great job. I can't believe that the Japanese authorities (and let's make it clear that it's the authorities and not the Japanese people as a whole) think that this is acceptable. It just makes me feel sick to think about it. Research? Research my a..
Posted by: Justin | November 19, 2007 7:49 PM
As a supporter of the WDCS.
I am disgusted at the Japanese whaling fleet. It breaks my heart that they still feel the need to kill such beautiful creatures.
There is no justification whatsoever for this!
I will be thinking of you all and hope you can stop at least most, if not all of these mammals being slaughtered.
Rachael Kirby
Durham UK
Posted by: Rachael Kirby | November 19, 2007 8:21 PM
Thank you guys for having the dedication and courage to partake in this journey. I wish you so much success and a safe trip - the World needs more brave warriors like yourselves xx
Posted by: Jenni | November 19, 2007 8:54 PM
Hmmmm... if the reason for Japanese whaling really is scientific, they won't mind throwing away the meat instead of selling it to prove this. The Commision must ban the sale of whale meat. This way the 'want to eat whale meat' will very slowly be removed from the public conscious (slowly as in decades).
Posted by: Bonnie | November 19, 2007 9:11 PM
As a scientist I find it unbelievable that people can still do this kind of thing in the name of 'Science'. This is why the baddie in hollywood movies is always a mad scientist...
You guys are awesome! Every day you are out there trying to stop this helps keep our oceans healthy and our planet alive. We need vast heavily policed fish sanctuaries across the globe protecting all of our precious marine life.
Posted by: Ashton Bradley | November 19, 2007 9:36 PM
As a contributing member of Greenpeace in Germany I could not stand any more to sit here and do nothing about this issue. So I started my own email campaign yesterday to contact as much people as possible, asking them to write their protest on their blogs, flooding the internet with messages of dismay. These are only tiny tiny steps but I think the more people - especially the younger ones - are aware of this crime there might be some hope that this killing stops before it is too late.
People - use your blogs for your protest!
Posted by: Petra Voegtle | November 20, 2007 12:03 AM
Hi guys,Thanks for being true warriors.
We're thinking of you all and praying for success.
Posted by: Louise | November 20, 2007 4:03 AM
Thank god for you brave guys. It breaks my heart and makes me so angry that the Japanese think killing thousands of whales is research. The governments of the world should be doing more to stop this meaningless killing. Well done guys for trying to keep our Marine life safe
Posted by: Shuna | November 20, 2007 5:12 AM
Good luck Greenpeace you have my best wishes and I hope you get the bastards. There is just no reason why the should be whaling it is just their selfish nature! We need to get the word out there and hopefully we will one day stop them permanently
Posted by: NZgal![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://weblog.greenpeace.org/whales/nav-commenters.gif)
|
November 20, 2007 6:48 AM
Here is my idea. Does anyone know how to publicize it? Please help..JAPANESE VEHICLE ZERO-PURCHASE DAY DEC 1st. The goal will be to make Dec 1st a one-day boycott of Japanese vehicles worldwide in order to protest the Japanese Whale Hunt. On Dec 1st, not a single Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Suzuki, Yamaha, Kawasaki, or any other Japanese vehicle will be sold.
Posted by: Steve Elliott | November 20, 2007 7:28 AM
As a scientists I too am in disbelief that such 'harvesting' is taking place in the name of 'science'. The purpose behind this action is not pulling the wool over anyone's eyes.
Ok,so Greenpeace is asking us to remain calm and non-inflammatory. It is very difficult NOT to be reactionary. I am in agreement with several that we should be looking to boycott Japanese products, certainly to a degree that will at least tell the Japanese government that the world IS watching. As a photographer that is a difficult line to consider (almost everything is Japanese), but especially since this is a government fleet, should not consumers make other choices? Also I am about 4 months from making a car purchase and Subaru was my first choice. It isn't anymore.
Short of making donations to Greenpeace what else can we do to help out?
Posted by: Argo | November 20, 2007 4:50 PM
Makes you lose faith in humanity. It's all a sham to put whale meat on the tables for fat Japanese businessmen in trendy Tokyo restaurants. Aren't the Japanese always talking about honour? What honour is there in slaughtering these magnificent creatures? It makes about as much sense as killing a bunch of giant pandas to establish the nutritional content of bamboo. There's no logic to any of this research. Anyway, I'm personally boycotting anything Japanese and I wish the EU had the balls to do it. A few sanctions would soon make them review scientific whaling policies. I'm fed up with these pathetic excuses from a nation who should act responsibly. As for you Greenpeace guys out there on the boats, God bless you and good luck.
Posted by: Phil Carroll | November 20, 2007 6:03 PM
May I suggest a way how to check the scientific reasoning of those Japanese scientists who claim that their research work needs killing the objects of their study?
I suggest to ask a well established scientific journal like Nature or Science to please do the following:
- publish a list of scientific publications which originate from these sources which claim to do scientific research
- the author or principal investigator of these publications should be invited to write one "Letter to Nature" or a similar correspondence (limited to x words length).
The author or principal investigator is invited to explain why s/he thinks this research work contributes to the scientific knowledge about the whale species under investigation and why this research work could not have been carried out without terminating the lives of these animals.
- i think the journal should dedicate the appropriate space in the journal for these replies (if there are any)
- in a last step the journal forwards the communication to a peer reviewer team asking for a meta study of the responses. The journal then publishes the result.
The Japanese government then is asked for their comments.
Posted by: a marine biologists | November 28, 2007 10:07 PM
People killing whales for research? Now that's whaleshit!
Posted by: daninozland | December 14, 2007 6:28 AM
Hi
I just wanted to thank u guys for being so brave and being able to stand up for yourself and the whales i am so angry and upset cuz of wat the japanese people do to the whales its so horrible so i just wanted to thank u.
Posted by: carly jordan | December 14, 2007 12:59 PM
No body benefits from scientific whaling. Like the previous entry, the culture of whaling in Japan is just shameful. As a country that prides itself on honor and warrior spirits, the act of using scientific research as an excuse to the continuation of their taste of whale meat is right at the bottom of the honor list. On the spiritual ladder however, Japanese whaler and whaling companies gets ranked somewhere between leeches and dead plankton residues at the bottom of the ocean where they belong.
Posted by: James Li | December 18, 2007 9:24 PM
Yes, its just too bad.
Seems no one can just leave these animals alone, Science or Green Peace!
Did someone mention BIOPSY??
OMG..Just leave them be alone for a change....While we drill into and murder away North America's FAT WHALE like children instead..
Good Start!
Just let them be already...All of you!
sheesh.
Posted by: JAY | December 21, 2007 10:05 PM