The establishment of an Antarctic Whale Sanctuary was approved at the International Whaling Commission's (IWC) meeting in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, earlier this year. This ignited sparks of controversy among scientists, whale protectionists and other concerned bodies. The sanctuary, which encompasses an area more than two-thirds the size of the African continent, was approved by an overwhelming majority, with only Japan voting against it. (...)
Undeniably there are stocks of minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) that could be harvested on a sustainable basis. Indeed, the regulations proposed for the exploitation of minke whales, in terms of their stringency, would hamper most of the world's commercial fisheries.
But with a changing world come changing attitudes and ethics, and today the prevailing opinion worldwide is that whales should not be harvested. They are viewed by many as having a greater value alive than dead, although it is unlikely that we as humans will ever reach consensus on the 'value' of aestheticism or indeed on the 'right' to use a resource. Whales enrich the lives of the vast majority of the people who encounter them, and they have a symbolic appeal to the spirit of those who may never see a whale. As a result, the consumptive use of whales has become so unacceptable to so large a fraction of the human population that public sentiment must be addressed.
Basing wildlife utilization policies on anything other than science is undoubtedly a risky business, but perhaps the role of science is only to provide a basis for decisions, the decisions themselves being moulded by the prevailing feelings of the public who 'own' a global resource such as whales. The 'no hunting' vote in Mexico, classified by some as a modern day example of cultural or ecological imperialism, might be the precursor to an era of environmental democracy.
The 'tragedy of the commons' has been blamed for the erosions of biological resources worldwide. Perhaps the only way in which this 'tragedy' will be averted is for a sufficiently strong international reaction to be evoked that people sit back and evaluate its long-term consequences. The declaration of the sanctuary is a democratic decision because, apart from space, the oceans are the only life-supporting media that are 'the commons'. The 'tragedy of the commons' exists because the commons are defined by personal interest. As whales inhabit the global commons, the decision of whether or not to allow them to be harvested should be a democratic one resolved in the global arena. The declaration of the whale sanctuary has a symbolic appeal to the human psyche, which, however irrational, has to play an important role in any such democratic decisions.