Environmentalists pursue Japan's whalers

[james]

SYDNEY (Reuters) - A hardline environmentalist group chasing Japanese whalers near Antarctica said on Saturday it would do its utmost to disrupt the hunt although bad weather had thwarted a stink bomb attack on one vessel..link

[Tengu Kid]

SYDNEY (Reuters) - A hardline environmentalist group chasing Japanese whalers near Antarctica said on Saturday it would do its utmost to disrupt the hunt although bad weather had thwarted a stink bomb attack on one vessel..link

Hey folks, what do you all think about whaling?
I never really bothered forming much of an opinion on it and probably should know a little bit more than I do. Although I primarily use this site to laugh my tits off (the line `Id bang her harder than a screen door in a hurricane` stood out recently) I always think that you guys have pretty educated and balanced views (Take, Jack, ignore the last sentence). So tell me them!

[Greji]

(the line `Id bang her harder than a screen door in a hurricane` stood out recently)

Ahh, great minds think alike! Who's got time for whales...

[IkemenTommy]

Hey folks, what do you all think about whaling?

They taste good?

[Tengu Kid]

They taste good?

hahahaha thats the best im getting is it?
No moral outrage from anywhere?

[Yokohammer]

Here are a few key points:

* In 1982 the IWC voted to impose a moratorium on commercial whaling, to be put into effect from the 1986 whaling season. This was done for conservation reasons as well as more far-reaching environmental concerns.

* Currently there are only three countries that practice whaling: Norway, Iceland, and Japan.

* Norway has registered an official objection to the IWC moratorium and is thus not bound by it. But out of consideration for the spirit of the moratorium Norway's catch is relatively small (around 500 whales ... they have a much larger quota, but don't meet it), and is limited to Northeast Atlantic minke whales.

* Iceland resumed commercial whaling in 2006 after fooling round with "scientific whaling" for a few years, with an annual quota of 30 minke whales (yes, that's only "thirty" whales) and 9 fin whales, all caught in the Northeast Atlantic.

* Japan is a member of the IWC and is bound by the moratorium (although they claim they were "tricked" into it by the US), so they simply catch a ridiculously large number of whales (their quota is around 1,300 I believe) under the pretense of "scientific whaling." It's no secret that this is just a sham – there are restaurants that serve whale meat all across the country – and therein lies the reason for the moral outrage.

* Another problem with Japan's whaling problem – and the one that irks me the most – is that while the other whaling countries stick to their own turf, the Japanese whalers operate in an internationally recognized marine sanctuary in and around Australian waters. They get away with this by simply refusing to recognize it as a sanctuary, essentially thumbing their noses at everyone else.

* Amongst the loud whining coming from the Japanese Fisheries Agency can be heard accusations that anti-whaling groups are racist. That it's cultural imperialism. Norway and Iceland catch whales without copping the flak that the Japanese whalers get. Well that's because they do it in their own waters, they do it on a relatively small scale, they don't do it under false pretenses, and they do it with a certain amount of consideration and sensitivity to the issue. Japan's approach is pretty belligerent, which is why they attract the attention of Green Peace and more (over the top) hard-line groups like the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

There's more, but that's the basics.

[Iraira]

Ate the nasty stuff once....didn't get it...sorry J-pan, I don't get it, it just doesn't work for me as a potential food item.

What annoys me is how J-pan continues to lie about the whole thing, "bribe" other countries into trying to overturn international law (note: not the moratorium itself, the process at which J-pan goes about it) , and how J-pan wants to feed the crapmeat to their kids.
BS about how if the whale pop gets too big it will threaten the ocean's microflora baleen populations from a J-scientist was good comedy, but pathetic nevertheless.
Seems like the J. Cetacean Society has hired a gaijin or two to serve as English langauge propaganda ministers. Hope they are making a bundle.

I just woke up, so this is disjointed, but just the lack of any honesty from Japan is the annoying part. If they just came out and said, "Look, whale is how we roll, mazza-Fahkahz", it would become even less of an issue for me than it is. Shows the typical "lack of sac" displayed in many situations in J-pan.

[james]

all good points. i think another source of the outrage too is that all of this is going on while real demand for whale meat is extremely moribund at best all the while the j-gov is subsidizing the industry.

moral issues aside, the mercury toxicity of whale meat alone should be a very strong disincentive to its consumption.

[AlbertSiegel]

I really hope someone sinks every ship the Sea Shepherd has and its crew of pot-head hippies to the bottom of the sea. Nothing but a bunch of eco-terrorists that should be treated no different than any other terrorists.

[Yokohammer]

I really hope someone sinks every ship the Sea Shepherd has and its crew of pot-head hippies to the bottom of the sea. Nothing but a bunch of eco-terrorists that should be treated no different than any other terrorists.

Nice rational response there.

And you think the whalers' total disregard for international opinion as well as an agreement to which they are party, plus their dishonest tactics, are excusable?

[omae mona]

I don't have any sympathy for whaling at all. However, I think it's worth looking at some facts and figures. I don't think it's reasonable to compare Iceland, Norway, and Japan's absolute catch to each other, because the populations of each country are radically different. Japan has over 400 times the population of Iceland. I am taking the whaling figures out of Yokohammer's message, combined with the latest population statistics for Iceland, Norway, and Japan. Here's what my fancy 99 yen calculator tells me:

Iceland (population 304,367) : 7,804 people per whale
Norway (population 4,644,457) : 9,288 people per whale
Japan (population 127,433,494): 98,025 people per whale

In other words, Iceland and Norway kill OVER TEN TIMES as many whales per person as does Japan. Japan really doesn't look so bad here by comparison. I wish all three countries would stop the whaling entirely. And yes, Japan is obnoxious about it, and that contributes to the negative publicity.

But now that I see Iceland and Norway do 10 times as much whaling per capita as Japan, I can partially understand Japan's argument that they're being picked on unfairly, compared to the European whaling nations.

Of course the opposite argument is that it's precisely BECAUSE Japan's so big that it's a problem. They are doing 70% of the whaling, so stopping their activity would presumably have a big impact.

[Samurai_Jerk]

Nice rational response there.

And you think the whalers' total disregard for international opinion as well as an agreement to which they are party, plus their dishonest tactics, are excusable?

What's irrational about it? He's anti-terrorism and the Sea Shepards are terrorists and pirates who use illegal tactics, lies, and progaganda to further a radical cause. Their fat fuck pussy of a leader has a very extreme worldview and is so far out there that even those assholes at Greenpeace kicked him out.

I watched some episodes of that new show "Whale Wars" where they follow Sea Shepard activities when I was back home for Thanksgiving (was it on Aniaml Planet or Dsicovery?). A great example of their bullshit is using a speed boat to charge the whaling ship so that two of their members can unlawfully board and then claiming the whalers have taken their people hostage. Then having some guy who probably spent a year getting drunk on a NOVA working holiday and picking up bits and pieces of the language with his gaijin kabure bar whore girlfriend with a pocket Japanese to English dictionary work as their interpreter and claiming they're being ignore when he's just spewing out incomprehensible pidgin Japanese over the airwaves.

I also hate to see resources wasted when there are actually important problems they could be using all that time, enery, and money to work on.

[Yokohammer]

OM, your calculations are correct, I think.

But remember, this is "whaling for scientific research," so a whales-per-person rationale shouldn't really apply. We'd also need to know how whale parts are used in Norway and Iceland, and if they're exported to other regions, for example, to really make that line of reasoning work.

But also as James mentioned, I don't believe the demand for whale meat is really high enough to justify the quota (no figures to back that up though, sorry). Young folk just aren't interested. And the enterprise is subsidized by the J-government.

So why do it? That's where things get a bit murky and it becomes difficult to suss out what the heck is going on. Politics and "you can't tell us what to do" pride are probably are large part of it. You don't see the average guy on the street clamoring for more whale meat, so why stubbornly antagonize most of the rest of the world over this issue?

I can't help thinking (and a lot of people agree with me) that there's a large dose of national pride involved. Sort of a fisheries version of the right-wing sound trucks.

I could be wrong, but that's the way it looks.

[Yokohammer]

What's irrational about it? He's anti-terrorism and the Sea Shepards are terrorists and pirates who use illegal tactics, lies, and progaganda to further a radical cause. Their fat fuck pussy of a leader has a very extreme worldview and is so far out there that even those assholes at Greenpeace kicked him out.

... etc ...

I'm not condoning the Sea Shepherd approach at all, SJ. They are extremists. Totally over the top. But the whalers are extremists as well, only in a more organized, government-subsidized way. To simply say that the Sea Shepherd ships and their pot-smoking hippie crews (how does he know that?) should be sunk is an extremist view in itself. It is an unbalanced, irrational response.

[Samurai_Jerk]

I'm not condoning the Sea Shepherd approach at all, SJ. They are extremists. Totally over the top. But the whalers are extremists as well, only in a more organized, government-subsidized way. To simply say that the Sea Shepherd ships and their pot-smoking hippie crews (how does he know that?) should be sunk is an extremist view in itself. It is an unbalanced, irrational response.

I completely disagree. Most legal experts say that the Japanese are not breaking the law, whereas the Sea Sheps are. I think sinking a pirates' ship and hunting them down are totally justified. They are no better than the guys in Somalia. Actually, I'd say they're worse. The guys in Somalia are at least doing it because they and their people need money to survive.

[Yokohammer]

I completely disagree. Most legal experts say that the Japanese are not breaking the law, whereas the Sea Sheps are. I think sinking a pirates' ship and hunting them down are totally justified. They are no better than the guys in Somalia. Actually, I'd say they're worse. The guys in Somalia are at least doing it because they and their people need money to survive.

Regardless of whether the Sea Shepherd people are breaking the law or not (they probably are), the fact that the J-whalers aren't doesn't make what they're doing right. The letter of the law is no guarantee of righteousness. The way I see it the whalers are pushing the law right up to the limit. They are using a loophole in a moratorium to which they are bound to do whatever they please. It's not illegal, but it's wrong. They are killing whales in an internationally recognized marine sanctuary that is halfway around the world from their own territorial waters. That's not illegal either, but it is morally wrong in my view. Skirting the law with middle finger extended towards a majority who vehemently disagree is not honorable at all.

And making it a Sea Shepherd issue totally misses the point.

[kusai Jijii]

...some guy who probably spent a year getting drunk on a NOVA working holiday and picking up bits and pieces of the language with his gaijin kabure bar whore girlfriend...

And your point is?

Been there, got the T-shirt!

[AlbertSiegel]

Nice rational response there.

As is yours...

And you think the whalers' total disregard for international opinion as well as an agreement to which they are party, plus their dishonest tactics, are excusable?

I'm sorry, but I just can't support the tactics of the Sea Shepherd. You simply do not go around sinking ships and injuring people because you have a point of view that is a 'total disregard for international opinion' on international law. The Japanese are not doing anything illegal according to most legal experts and even if they were, it's not up to a group of eco-terrorists to go after them.

Regardless of whether the Sea Shepherd people are breaking the law or not (they probably are)

No question that they are... have you seen or read about their tactics? They have used extreme methods of violence and have sunk ships. They even posted a video of them ramming a ship with pride. It's quite clear that they are breaking the law.

, the fact that the J-whalers aren't doesn't make what they're doing right. The letter of the law is no guarantee of righteousness.

And your opinion is right? They hunt an animal for food. How is this any different than beef or pork? A life is a life. Unless you only eat grass and ignore the entire history of life on this planet, you cannot judge one society's diet as wrong.

The way I see it the whalers are pushing the law right up to the limit. They are using a loophole in a moratorium to which they are bound to do whatever they please.

Of the three whaling countries, Japan is the only one bound to this law and they do comply within the limits of it.

It's not illegal, but it's wrong.

According to who? Again, life is life. What's so special about a whale versus a cow or a fish?

They are killing whales in an internationally recognized marine sanctuary that is halfway around the world from their own territorial waters. That's not illegal either, but it is morally wrong in my view.

Your view... My view they are doing nothing wrong.

Skirting the law with middle finger extended towards a majority who vehemently disagree is not honorable at all.

Every person in every country in the world does this. Please tell me of one group of people or one country that is honorable.

And making it a Sea Shepherd issue totally misses the point.

The Sea Shepherd is the point! They are what I have an issue with. I'm fine with green peace and other non-violent organizations. I am not fine with terrorists such as the members of Sea Shepherd.

[kusai Jijii]

What's with everyone using the 'terrorist" word?

[amdg]

It's amusing to me that the Sea Shepherd boat is a contributor to ocean pollution.

[Yokohammer]

Albert, you're misreading what I'm saying in so many ways ...

Nowhere did I say it's wrong to eat whales. If it's truly a cultural thing, then no problem.

I'm sorry, but I just can't support the tactics of the Sea Shepherd. You simply do not go around sinking ships and injuring people because you have a point of view that is a 'total disregard for international opinion' on international law. The Japanese are not doing anything illegal according to most legal experts and even if they were, it's not up to a group of eco-terrorists to go after them.

No question that they are... have you seen or read about their tactics? They have used extreme methods of violence and have sunk ships. They even posted a video of them ramming a ship with pride. It's quite clear that they are breaking the law.

This is another reaction that is totally off the mark. I said several times that I do not agree with the Sea Shepherd methods. This is a non-argument.

At the same time I can't recall when they've sunk a whaling vessel. Can you point me to the relevant information?

And your opinion is right? They hunt an animal for food. How is this any different than beef or pork? A life is a life. Unless you only eat grass and ignore the entire history of life on this planet, you cannot judge one society's diet as wrong.

Once again, this is a knee-jerk reaction that has nothing to do with what I said. Totally off the mark. If you or anyone else wants to eat whale, fine!

Of the three whaling countries, Japan is the only one bound to this law and they do comply within the limits of it.

I'm sorry, but this is wrong. The "scientific whaling" thing is a lie. They have to say that to be in compliance, but they are lying.

According to who? Again, life is life. What's so special about a whale versus a cow or a fish?

There you go again. Knees jerking all over the place. Nowhere, and I repeat, NOWHERE did I say it was wrong to eat whale. You are putting arguments in my mouth, and I don't appreciate it.

Every person in every country in the world does this. Please tell me of one group of people or one country that is honorable.

This makes no sense to me either. So, because you seem to think that everyone in the world is dishonorable (which is not true), then it's OK to be dishonorable?

The Sea Shepherd is the point! They are what I have an issue with. I'm fine with green peace and other non-violent organizations. I am not fine with terrorists such as the members of Sea Shepherd.

But your suggestion that they should be sunk is a terrorist response. And it takes the focus away from the real issue, which is the whaling itself. This of course is what the whalers do too. They point to the bad eco-terrorists and say "look, look what they're doing!" in order to divert attention away from their own actions. Very convenient.

The issue is the whaling. Not directly because it's morally wrong to eat whale, but because of conservation and the reprehensible deception and doublespeak that it involves.

I don't mind arguing, but if you're going to argue please argue against something I've actually said rather than putting words in my mouth.

[Tengu Kid]

Good stuff good stuff!
Does anyone know any facts and figures about endangered whales? Is the whole issue simply one of morality (its wrong/right to eat whale) or is there also an issue of extinction?

[Yokohammer]

Good stuff good stuff!
Does anyone know any facts and figures about endangered whales? Is the whole issue simply one of morality (its wrong/right to eat whale) or is there also an issue of extinction?

It involves all of the above, although the morality issue is not where it started.

Here's a direct quote from the Wikipedia entry on Whaling, which seems to be pretty balanced and accurate (no mention of Sea Shepherd!)

"International debates over whaling have focused on issues of sustainability and conservation as well as ownership and national sovereignty. Also raised in debates is the question of cetacean intelligence and the level of suffering which the animals undergo during harvest. Since the International Whaling Commission (IWC) 1986 moratorium on commercial whaling, the value of lethal sampling of whales for scientific research in order to establish catch quotas has also been debated. Finally, the value of whaling to fisheries as a method of controlling whales' perceived negative impact on fish stocks is another point of debate."

If you're interested you might want to check out the whole entry, here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling

The real problem is that there is no conclusive evidence for any of it, so the IWC decided it would be better to not tempt fate and avoid potential ecological problems by simply stopping whaling. A stance with which the majority agreed. Seems sensible to me. A small minority, as noted, decided that eating whale, and more specifically making money off commercial whaling, was more important than cooperating with the majority or possibly saving a species or two from extinction.

[Samurai_Jerk]

And your point is?

Been there, got the T-shirt!

My point is that the guy's Japanese was shit and I'm sure largely incomprehensible to the Japanese whalers if they were listening, so he is a poor choice for an interpreter and negotiator for a tense situation on the high seas. Showing him broadcasing jibberish, not getting a response, and then portraying it as if the Japanese are ignoring them without knowing what's actually happening on the other boat is a load of shit. Actually, I don't know why Sea Shep let themselves get filmed of that show. I think it's making them look like a bunch of assholes and hurting their cause. My brother who did an undergrad degree in conservation biology and is in grad school for biology now supported them in theory without knowing much about what they do because he's against Japanese whaling. After watching a few episodes of "Whale Wars" though he was hoping to see one of those fuckers get harpooned by the Japanese.

[Samurai_Jerk]

Regardless of whether the Sea Shepherd people are breaking the law or not (they probably are), the fact that the J-whalers aren't doesn't make what they're doing right. The letter of the law is no guarantee of righteousness. The way I see it the whalers are pushing the law right up to the limit. They are using a loophole in a moratorium to which they are bound to do whatever they please. It's not illegal, but it's wrong. They are killing whales in an internationally recognized marine sanctuary that is halfway around the world from their own territorial waters. That's not illegal either, but it is morally wrong in my view. Skirting the law with middle finger extended towards a majority who vehemently disagree is not honorable at all.

And making it a Sea Shepherd issue totally misses the point.

I'm not arguing morality or honor. The law is there to keep us compliant to the law not the make us honorable or moral. What you have is one group who's not breaking the law and one group who is. Unless it's a military or law enforcement action, forcefully boarding a ship is an act of piracy. Making "it" a Sea Shepherd issue is the point. The first post in this thread was a link to an article about Sea Shepherd.

[Yokohammer]

I'm not arguing morality or honor. The law is there to keep us compliant to the law not the make us honorable or moral.

This is a fresh interpretation. I always thought that laws were rules introduced to enforce fundamental morality, as much as that is possible: i.e. no killing, no stealing, no deception for personal gain ... etc. Morals first, then laws.

What you have is one group who's not breaking the law and one group who is. Unless it's a military or law enforcement action, forcefully boarding a ship is an act of piracy.

I'm getting really tired of saying this, but just for the record, again, I do not in any way condone the Sea Shepherd group's actions.

Making "it" a Sea Shepherd issue is the point. The first post in this thread was a link to an article about Sea Shepherd.

That's getting a bit specious. I was responding to a request for information about the whaling issue.

[hundefar]

What's with everyone using the 'terrorist" word?

Only a terrorist supporter would question the use of the word 'terrorist'.

[Yokohammer]

Hey this is fun ... some wuss coward just called me a "commie" via the reputation thing ... anonymously.

A perfect demonstration of "dishonorable."

Obviously you know who you are: If you can't discuss issues in a forthright manner without back-door name-calling there's no point in continuing.

Forget it.

[Samurai_Jerk]

Hey this is fun ... some wuss coward just called me a "commie" via the reputation thing ... anonymously.

A perfect demonstration of "dishonorable."

Obviously you know who you are: If you can't discuss issues in a forthright manner without back-door name-calling there's no point in continuing.

Forget it.

So we can assume Yokohammer is your real name?

[Yokohammer]

[quote="Samurai_Jerk"]So we can assume Yokohammer is your real name? ]

As much as Samurai Jerk is yours.

You know you can address me by that name at any time and respond to anything I say. You can PM me if you like.

If I were to drop anonymous insults in your inbox, or wherever, you wouldn't have that option.