At the 69th International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting in Peru last week, pro-whaling nations shut down the possibility of creating a South Atlantic whale sanctuary. At the same meeting, attempts to bring back commercial whaling, both directly and under the guise of food security, failed.
South Atlantic whale sanctuary
For 26 successive years, Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay have put forward the proposal to create a whale sanctuary in the South Atlantic. It would have prevented any commercial hunting of cetaceans within its waters. This would have extended from the east coasts of Uruguay, Brazil, and Argentina across to Western Africa. It also would have sat next to the Southern Ocean Sanctuary, which the IWC created in 1994.
In order for a proposal to be successful, it has to achieve a 75% majority – which it failed to do by just one or two votes. 40 countries voted in favour, 14 opposed, and 3 abstained.
According to Humane Society International (HSI):
Almost half of the world’s known species, subspecies and subpopulations of cetaceans, are listed as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable. Species such as humpbacks, southern right whales and more inhabit the southern Atlantic, and these populations are still recovering from decimation due to intensive commercial whaling of previous centuries. It is crucial that the sanctuary is established to ensure that these whale species recover and thrive.
Undermining the commercial whaling ban
Also on the agenda at the IWC’s meeting were two proposals which attempted to undermine the commercial whaling ban. However, both of these proposals were withdrawn before they could be voted on.
Firstly, the Republic of Guinea submitted an indirect assault on the ban. This was a proposal on food security. Cambodia, the Ivory Coast, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, the Republic of Congo, Senegal, and St. Kitts and Nevis all co-sponsored the proposal.
These are all countries which are closely aligned with Japan – a fiercely pro-whaling country. The proposal claimed that commercial whaling was justified due to the necessity for food security. However, as the Canary has previously documented, there is no evidence that whale meat makes any meaningful contribution to food security.
Antigua and Barbuda also submitted a direct assault on the ban. This was in the form of a proposal to lift the global moratorium on commercial whaling. According to HSI, the “dark and dangerous proposal” aimed to undermine the more than 40-year-old ban on commercial whale killing. St. Lucia co-sponsored the resolution – another close ally of Japan.
However, whale-friendly nations voted by a resounding majority to accept a resolution to reaffirm the global ban on commercial whale killing. Submitted by the European Union, it received 37 yes votes, 12 no votes, and 8 abstentions.
Grettel Delgadillo, deputy director of HSI for Latin America said:
The EU tabled this compassionate and conservation-minded proposal to remind countries of their legal obligations pertaining to commercial whaling.
Considering the persistent attempts by pro-whaling nations to dismantle the 40-year-old ban, the message behind this proposal is much needed. Thanks to the moratorium, the lives of hundreds of thousands of whales will have been saved and many species brought back from the brink of extinction.
Commercial whaling is unethical, unsustainable and unnecessary so we welcome the passing of this proposal as a signal to all nations that the world must continue to save the whales.
Bending the rules
The IWC banned commercial whale hunting in 1986, with the exception of scientific research. Whilst Japan did always technically obey this, they continued to kill a whopping 333 whales each year and stated this was for ‘research purposes’. Japan has been pushing for the ban to be scrapped since its inception, and have since withdrawn from the IWC.
As HSI has pointed out, the commercial whaling ban has been instrumental in bringing many species back from the brink of extinction.
HSI has joined with other NGO’s in signing a letter to the Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda. The letter condemned the proposal. It pointed out that the country’s own Environmental Protection and Management Act 2019 designates all species of whales, dolphins, and porpoises as protected and prohibits their hunting.
Dr Madison Miketa, wildlife scientist at Humane Society International, said:
Whales are worth far more alive than dead and are critically important for healthy, productive oceans. For communities reliant on eco-tourism and whale watching income, or those dependent on healthy fish stocks, the presence of abundant whale populations is a lifeline.
Furthermore, killing these long-lived, slow reproducing animals who are also impacted by myriad human-caused threats such as climate change, pollution and fisheries bycatch, would do nothing to ameliorate food insecurity.
Not to mention that whale meat and blubber are often contaminated with high levels of pollutants and heavy metals such as mercury and PCBs, making them unsafe for human consumption.
Feature image via Environmental Investigation Agency/Youtube
