Hi Dave,

I think your arguments are growing thinner those of the ICR and JFA. After all, you have to base your assertions on quotes of Japanese representative taken out of their context and translated from Japanese to English.

Once again, you quote John Frizell's critic of Japanese scientific programmes, but the views of the IWC's Scientific Committee are quite different from his.

I'll do like you and quote some passages of an article from the BBC News website. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6667907.stm

In this article, we learn from a former American commissioner and cetacean scientist, William Evans, that "But... you have really got to use more invasive techniques in order to get certain answers that you're looking for."

A bit further, Arne Bjorge, chair of the scientific committee says "the Japanese input into cetacean research in Antarctica is significant, and I would say crucial for the (IWC) scientific committee." He also added "To make it very short, the review panel was very pleased with the data (Japan has) collected and provided from the programme."

You also forget to mention that the Japanese programmes include a combination of lethal and non-lethal methods. But, if you really believe that that it is possible to provide the same data on whales as the Japanese scientists, maybe you should try out non-lethal methods while you are in the Antarctic and collect the faeces of some 1035 whales, for example.

Anyway, the JFA has always made it clear that the goal of their research is to allow the sustainable management of whaling (Certainly not "full-blown commercial whaling" as you say). Since the moratorium was adopted in 1982 because of so called uncertainties about the data on whales stocks, it is normal that Japan started research programmes to solve those uncertainties.

As for the terrorists claims, I recognize they are not really founded concerning Greenpeace's actions. I however believe your relation with Sea Shepherd is ambiguous. You certainly knew that Sea Shepherd could have used your "great whale trail" map to localize the Japanese fleet and do their dirty job.
Sea Shepherd are terrorists (that is to provoke terror through violent actions) and certainly don't care for the environment at all. Helping them may be viewed as terrorism too...

Hi Isanatori, I will hopefully get back to you and answer all your questions in time, but firstly, our relationship with Sea Shepherd is not ambigious - we don't work with them, end of story. You just have to look at the things Sea Shepherd says about us to realise that Mr Watson is no fan of Greenpeace.

As to the terrorist charge - one specific case was last February in the Ross Sea, when we were standing by, offering assistance to the Nisshin Maru. We had a good relationship with the mission leader on board, but the FAJ were still calling *us* terrorists, and turning down our help (the fact that we were obligated to assist is neither here nor there - we would have done it anyway).

Here's a letter to Paul Watson from Gerd Leipold, International Executive Director of Greenpeace. Tells you all you need to know.

And furthermore, Isanatori, you need to work on those critical thinking skills of yours.

William Evans comments that "some lethal research might be necessary from a strictly scientific standpoint." Let's analyze this sentence, shall we? First of all, "Some" could mean as little as one whale out of many thousands. Evans is implying that there might be a few SPECIAL situations when lethal methods might be necessary. He is NOT implying that such methods are always or even frequently necessary, as in the Japanese model of harpoon first and "study" and eat later. Furthermore, Evans uses the phrase "from a strictly scientific standpoint" Clearly the Japanese whaling program is not "strictly scientific." You should know this by now.

As for Arne Bjorge, he is a researcher at the University of Oslo in Norway, and his salary is paid by the Norwegian government, who also has an interest in commercial whaling. Do you really think he would oppose the practice of whaling at the risk of loosing his academic appointment?

The truth is that we are living in the 21st century. If people are fond of old whaling traditions, then they can go read some Herman Melville, and leave the real whales alone.

Hi Dave,
I have just read the Norwegian prowhaling paper " Fiskeribladet".

The Norwegian Whalers Union have had their annual meeting this weekend.

Some interesting excerpts from the paper:

- Norway may leave the IWC in 2009. New management organisation will be NAMMCO.

- The scientific advisor, Mr Walloe, stated as well " that he feared science based on politics". Any comments?

Hi again,
In the Norwegian paper , it was also stated that the man behind the design of the explosive harpoon, Professor Öen, said " we live with " an urban arrogance " where the " urbanites" state " that we don't need whalers". Probably he is referring to the notion that rural people think that anti whaling protesters are a bunch of misinformed suburban kiddos ( something along that line I read in another Norwegian paper).

Dave,

Well said and I wouldn't even waste your time arguing with him regarding this. The Japanese cannot even justify their whaling and neither can he. Bottom line is there isn't any scientific justification for this only the brutal killing of whales to feed people.

Because Peter Garrett, two weeks ago as the former Shadow Minister for the Environment said that his government if elected would send a naval vessel to the Southern Oceans to monitor the Japanese whaling fleet. Mr. Garrett also promised to take a much more aggressive position against Japanese whaling activities.

The former Liberal government were outspoken against whaling but did very little to actually stop the Japanese from continuing with their illegal activity.

Hundreds of people have notified the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society that they voted Labor because of the threat to the whales. Labor now has the opportunity to demonstrate that they will be a government of their word.

The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society expects to see an Australian Naval vessel dogging the pirate Japanese whaling fleet this year. Australians are incensed that Japan is targeting endangered humpback whales.

hi,

i read with interest on the esperanzas progress to the whale sanctuary.

i wish you all the luck in the world in bringing attention to the whaling issue and ultimately preventing the needless slaughter of these endangered animals but i cant help feeling it might be in vain.

i live in japan and have done for some time and i notice the complete lack of debate about whaling in the public arena.

the mainstream media totally ignore it and when it does appear it nearly always represents japan defending her traditions in the face of arrogant western powers and mostly focuses on the high seas terrorism instigated by greenpeace and sea sheperd, faced by the brave crews of the whaling fleet.

now, i know you are two totally seperate groups with entirely different approaches but that is conveniently ignored in presentation in japan for the most part.

it could be said that the japanese public is not very politically active anyway but that may be down to living in a fairly harmonious society in which rocking the boat (no pun intended) is frowned upon
but the only way to execute change in japanese policy in a swift manner is to enlist the japanese people to enforce it.

This will be difficult but Japanese people are like most people, the sight and knowledge of unecessary suffering and damage hits a nerve and if they know that the primary culprit is their own nation, i believe public perception would force the government to change tack.

whaling is a hidden issue here, as is the yearly dolphin slaughter and a reason exists for this which is obvious.

greenpeace must focus its efforts on hiring a very good and probably expensive japanese pr firm or SOMETHING to educate the public. it must be campaigned using japanese people and not japanese hippies, nothing against hippies but it wont work well in japan, no one will listen.

whaling in this country is run by a group of angry old men with dubious motives and it would seem questionable intelligence so a concerted effort could topple them.

none of my Japanese friends even know the whaling fleet has departed.

come on chaps, get on it.

take care

andy

Hi Isanitori..., ...and about your, "non-lethal methods while you are in the Antarctic and collect the faeces of some 1035 whales," ...and "uncertainties about the data on whales stocks, it is normal that Japan started research programmes to solve those uncertainties."
If you want to solve the uncertainties, all you need to do is go home and leave them alone. the whales don't need you, ...they never did. What rubbish, examining the faeces of more than a thousand whales. Who ever told you that these whales belonged to you? What if every country felt like that, ...go thousands of miles from your home to foreign oceans and lands to exploit and suck out their resources. You should understand how pointless your arguements sound to a world that doesn't want you to kill any whales, ...not one. The best thing you can do for yourself is to feel the pain when the harpoon strikes, as do these good people aboard the Esperanza do. Perhaps then you will begin to understand why you should stop doing this. It's not about sustainability, ...it's about pain, suffering, and disrespect for this miracle of life inside every creature, ...and we the vast majority of the world want you to stop it now.

Hi Dave,
Resolution adopted by the Annual General Meeting of the Norwegian Whalers’ Union, 30. November 2007

1. Norway and Japan have a long history of close and mutually beneficial cooperation on the whaling issue.
2. Such a cooperation should encompass all relevant aspects to an issue.
3. International trade in whale products is for Norway a very important aspect within such a cooperative framework.
4. Japan has for several years delayed trade with whale products between our two countries, despite promises of the opposite.

Thus Norway must now cease all cooperation with Japan on the whaling issue until the question of market access for Norwegian whale products to Japan has been solved.

(Translation from original text in Norwegian.) Rune Frovik

Isanatori commented
"After all, you have to base your assertions on quotes of Japanese representative taken out of their context and translated from Japanese to English."

Isanatori - can you explain to me how the quotes were taken out of context? The same AP writer, Hiroko Tabuchi - who I am sure is from Japan, called me over a satllite link, and quoted me just fine, in English.

Are you saying that the quotes given in the media by AP are *incorrect*? Can you pick any of the quotes from above, and tell me, trutfully, that the quoted officials didn't say those things?

Bjorge's quotes are rather interesting - I'll give you that, and probably in reference to this report.

Whatever Bjorge's opinions, a resolution was passed by the IWC against Japan's JARPA II project, in a vote of 40-2, plus a resolution in favour of the non-lethal use of whales (42-2).

Oh, also... on the matter of whale poo etc. Did you see New Scientist have a story on that?

@andy
Thank's for your comment - I think that's the way to go!

Hi Dave,
I think some of those whaler ships rest in our place sometimes, we would need to reconize them.
Best regards.

Hi Dave...,
Just to say thanks for all your appropriate comments here, ...and glad to see you back in action with the new crew, ...GC

Hi Dave,

Sorry for the delay in my reply.
I'm not saying that the quotes given by the AP are incorrect, but they are out of context. You can make say everything to quotes out of context.

For example, when you quote Hajime Ishikawa's '"They're violent environmental terrorists... their violence is unforgivable ... We must fight against their hypocrisy and lies.", we don't know who he's talking about. Even in the article from the Guardian, it's not clear. He may be speaking only of Seas Shepherd (who, in my opinion, can be called terrorists), or both GP and Sea Shepherd. It's not clear.

But, as I said in my previous comment, I don't think you (that is Greenpeace) are terrorists. However, I believe that showing the coordinates of the Japanese whaling fleet on your Great Whale Trail map, as you planned in the beginning, would have helped Sea Shepherd finding them and "harrass" them. You are not ignoring that some people are suspecting you of exchanging informations with the SSCS.

So when I quote Arne Bjorge, who is just summing up the discussions from the intersessional review workshop on JARPA results, not really giving his opinion, your only counter-argument is the resolutions passed by the anti-whaling camp at the IWC.
You'll certainly agree that the Commission itself is more about politics than science. So it's not really opposing Bjorge's comments on Japanese scientific programmes.

First, "isanatori": On what basis do you claim Sea Shepherd activists are "terrorists"? From any non-biased perspective this claim is simply outrageous and cynical and you yourself know this very well. You make this sort of claim, when the Nisshin Maru refuses to submit to Australian Federal Police investigations into the various collision incidents in which it has been involved with ships from both Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace. Sir, your position relies on us believing every single strained argument your side produces and thus could only be put forward by a liar and a fraud.

Second, I understand Greenpeace seeks to distance itself from Sea Shepherd and disapproves of its tactic, a position that is perfectly understandable. However standing by and letting accusations of "terrorism" pass without argument is simply wrong. You say "I don't wish to defend Sea Shepherd, but calling them terrorists is drawing a very long bow", or something similar - it's only decent. Japan's position is highly and increasingly marginal, both your organisations represent the majority view around the world. Don't divide the field by surrendering to Japan's insane "terrorism" claims.

I am not a member of either organisation, but I do note that Australia's $300 million whale watching industry is currently being threatened by Japan's $75 million whaling industry.