In support of his conclusion, Gambell referred to the fact that the catch limit for this category of hunt was set by calculating the needs of the local population from an estimated consumption per capita. This does not, however, apply to Greenland where the quota is set lower than the estimated need. He also pointed out that the definition of aboriginal subsistence whaling is rather unclear. The most widespread opinion is that the distinction is made between commercial and non-commercial whaling, and several nations represented at the IWC have clearly expressed that a commercial aspect was unacceptable even in small-type whaling operations. “Even though they recognize that some of the aboriginal Greenland catch is sold on the local markets,” notes Gambell.
He went on to refer to how a request from four small Japanese coastal communities for a quota of 50 minke whales was rejected during this year’s IWC meeting, even though the catch was to be shared out and distributed in a non-commercial context. Last year, the IWC passed a resolution recognising the socio-economic and cultural needs of these communities and the distress to which they were subject, resolving to work expeditiously to alleviate this distress. “This did nothing to help,” Gambell affirmed.
“What is the difference between feeding your family directly with whale meat and selling the whale meat in order to obtain food for your family? I have problems making the distinction,” said Gambell.