Source: "Whaling in the North Atlantic - Economic
and Political Perspectives," Ed. Gudrun Petursdottir, University of
Iceland, 1997, ISBN 9979-54-213-6. Proceedings of a conference held in Reykjavik
on March 1st, 1997, organized by the Fisheries Research Institute and the
High North Alliance.
Author: Ray Gambell, Secretary to the International Whaling Commission,
The Red House, 135 Station Road, Histon Cambridge, UK CB4 4NP
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
The 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling was drawn up as an agreement to control the catching operations of a particular fishery which throughout its long history “has seen over-fishing of one area after another and of one species of whale after another to such a degree that it is essential to protect all species of whales from further over-fishing.” In particular the Governments involved recognised “the interest of the nations of the world in safeguarding for future generations the great natural resources represented by the whale stocks.” The Convention sought to “establish a system of international regulation for the whale fisheries to ensure proper and effective conservation and development of whale stocks on the basis of the principles embodied in the provisions [of a whaling Agreement and Protocols signed in 1937, 1938 and 1945] to provide for the proper conservation of the whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry” (quotations from the Preamble to the Convention). The Contracting Governments agreed to establish an International Whaling Commission to implement these ideals, which is now interpreting the Convention much more as a conservation instrument in tune with the current environmental ethic, although the restrictions imposed in implementing this approach are not universally agreed or accepted by some of the communities most affected (Gambell, 1995, p.705).
The authors of the 1946 Convention were in a number of ways quite forward-looking in the language and concepts they embraced. The current ideals of wise use and sustainable development are already to be found in their text, although because of the reigning political and economic climates and the lack of fully credible scientific understanding, it was many years before they were applied and implemented in anything more than a rather nominal fashion.
Because it was recognised that the regulations governing the conduct of the whaling operations would need to be changed from time to time the practical rules determining such elements as the whaling areas, seasons, species, numbers and sizes of whales permitted to be caught are set out in the Schedule to the Convention, a document which can be amended by the Commission, normally at an Annual Meeting. Such amendments require a three-quarters majority of those Contracting Governments voting to be adopted, and there is an objection procedure for governments which may feel that their sovereign interests are unduly affected by such changes.
THE SPECIES COVERED
The main activity of the IWC during the early years of its existence was setting catch limits for the stocks of the great whales hunted in the Antarctic. This was done initially in terms of Blue Whale Units - the approximate oil yield equivalent of the different species whereby 1 blue whale was equal to 2 fin whales, 2 1/2 humpback or 6 sei whales. Catch limits by species were gradually introduced in other whaling areas world-wide, and in 1972 by species in the Antarctic.
The 1946 Convention does not define a ‘whale’, although a table of names in English, French, Dutch, Russian, Norwegian, Danish, Swedish and Spanish corresponding to the Latin names of the larger species of whales drawn up by a Committee on Use of Scientific Names was attached to the Final Act of the Convention with the recommendation “that the chart of Nomenclature of Whales annexed to this Final Act be accepted as a guide by the Governments represented at the Conference” (Recommendation IV of the International Whaling Conference). These species are the right (including bowhead) whales, pigmy right, humpback, blue, fin, sei, Bryde’s, minke, sperm, and the Arctic and Antarctic bottlenose whales.
Some governments, including Brazil, Chile, Denmark, Japan, Norway, and St Vincent and The Grenadines, take the view that the IWC has the legal competence to regulate catches only of these named great whales, and regard this list as definitive and limiting. Other governments, including Austria, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Oman, Switzerland, UK and USA, believe that the list was developed as an aid to avoid confusion during the negotiations in 1946 and that all cetaceans, including the smaller dolphins and porpoises, also fall within IWC jurisdiction.
Despite these differing views amongst the member countries over the question of legal competence, the IWC does recognise the need for international co-operation to conserve stocks of small cetaceans. An example of this occurred in response to an unprecedented catch of 916 killer whales by the Soviet Antarctic whaling fleets in the 1979/80 season. Although the Scientific Committee recognised that there is considerable uncertainty over the stock identity and abundance of this species, it recommended a zero catch limit. The Commission adopted this proposal by adding wording to the ban on factory ship whaling then in force to clarify that “This moratorium applies to sperm whales, killer whales and baleen whales, excluding minke whales” (IWC, 1981, p.21).
More recently the Commission has agreed that the Scientific Committee should draw together all available relevant information on the present status of those stocks of small cetaceans which are subjected to significant directed or incidental takes and on the impact of those takes on the stocks, and to provide such scientific advice as may be warranted (IWC, 1991, p.48). As part of this programme the Scientific Committee has investigated many species and stocks, and has carried out major reviews of catches of small cetaceans. The IWC has also encouraged countries to seek scientific advice on small cetaceans from the IWC, and invited IWC member nations to provide technical or financial assistance to countries with threatened small cetaceans stocks (IWC, 1993, pp.36-7, 51).
Because of the obvious need to overcome the legal problems which are preventing effective global management of small cetaceans, the IWC established a Working Group which met before the 1993 Annual Meeting to consider a mechanism to address small cetaceans in the IWC. Following this, the IWC adopted a Resolution that developed a preliminary framework under which small cetacean issues can be addressed co-operatively in the IWC, notwithstanding the different views over legal competence (IWC, 1994, pp.15-16, 31-2). The Working Group has discussed the way stocks are identified for review by the Small Cetaceans Sub-committee of the Scientific Committee; coastal state participation (including non-member countries) in research and review; and improving availability and reliability of data and information. The IWC has also established a voluntary fund to assist participation by developing countries in these matters (IWC, 1995a, pp.20-1, 41-2).
The practical outworking of this situation is that the Scientific Committee can make recommendations to the Commission concerning the management of the great whales stocks which it investigates in terms of status and trends of abundance, while it provides advice on the smaller cetacean species.
CURRENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The starting point for any discussion of the current activities of the IWC must be the present ban on commercial whaling world-wide. The difficulties in the management process and the uncertainty over the status of the stocks of great whales were important factors in the 1982 decision of the IWC to implement a pause in commercial whaling with effect from the 1986 coastal and 1985/86 pelagic whaling seasons. The IWC also agreed that by 1990 at the latest it would undertake a comprehensive assessment of the effects of the decision on whale stocks and consider modification and the establishment of other catch limits (IWC, 1983, pp. 20-1).
Comprehensive assessment
Following this decision, the Scientific Committee of the IWC embarked on
the process which came to be known as the Comprehensive Assessment of whale
stocks. It was defined by the scientists as an in-depth evaluation of the
status and trends of all whale stocks in the light of management objectives
and procedures (Donovan, 1989). Detailed assessments of gray whales in
the North Pacific, bowhead whales off Alaska, minke whales in the Southern
Hemisphere, North Atlantic and western North Pacific, and North Atlantic
fin whales have been carried out so far. Included in this process is the
determination of current numbers of whales in the different stocks. The
Scientific Committee has also accepted some other analyses, notably for
humpback and pilot whales in the North Atlantic; the numbers which the
IWC is prepared to give as the best estimates at this time are shown in
the Annex.
An important aspect of this assessment programme has been the development of rigorous sighting survey and photo-identification techniques, coupled with robust methods of analysis of the resulting data, leading to statistically reliable estimates of abundance of the various whale stocks considered (e.g. Hiby & Hammond, 1989: Buckland & Duff, 1989). The IWC has now decided that only surveys and analyses of data which fulfil the guidelines drawn up by the Scientific Committee can be used to provide abundance estimates as input in implementing the Revised Management Procedure (IWC, 1996, pp.27, 45-6).
Revised management procedure
Another part of the comprehensive assessment programme was the development
of a revised management procedure. Five different procedures were developed
and tested by a series of computer simulation trials but it was not possible
to complete this work by the original deadline of 1990 (Kirkwood, 1992).
However, through the process of consultations and comparisons between the
individual developers, these proposals came to the point where at its 1991
Annual Meeting the Scientific Committee recommended the IWC to adopt one
procedure as suitable for implementation as the replacement for the “New
Management Procedure” (NMP) which had been introduced in 1975 (IWC,
1992, pp.55-6).
The IWC formally adopted this revised procedure with some modifications at its 1994 Annual Meeting as the specification for the calculation of catch limits for baleen whales in a Revised Management Procedure (RMP) (IWC, 1995a, pp.26, 43-4). The objective is to provide an acceptable balance between conservation and exploitation of baleen whales and to provide a simple and convenient method for determining catch limits with minimal requirements for data. The procedure seeks to ensure that depleted stocks are rehabilitated, and that no whaling is permitted on stocks which are below 54% of their initial abundance. The aim is to obtain the highest possible continuing yield, with stable catch limits, to bring all stocks to the target level of 72% of their initial level. Both of these percentage levels have some relationship to the stock classifications based on the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) concept which formed the basis of the now discredited NMP.
The only data input required for the revised procedure are a current population estimate and the known catch history. The notional unexploited stock size is estimated using a simplified production model that includes no biological parameters. Initially a fixed MSY rate is assumed, but as more data accumulate the procedure tends gradually to one based on the best estimate of the MSY rate obtained by fitting the production model. The procedure has been tested in simulation trials over 100 years and is robust to a range of factors, including underestimation of historic catches by up to 50%, variations over time in carrying capacity and recruitment, environmental degradations and a wide range of uncertainty, including stock units and differing population dynamics. It is also a very conservative regime.
Supervision and control
Although the scientific component of any all-embracing revised management
scheme has been completed, the Commission has resolved that until all aspects
of the Revised Management Scheme, including an effective inspection and
observation scheme which fully addresses inter alia the issues of under-reporting
and mis-reporting of catches, are incorporated into the Schedule the Revised
Management Procedure should not be implemented (IWC 1995a, pp. 26, 43-4).
Data have recently been presented correcting the catch statistics submitted
from Soviet whaling operations in the Southern Hemisphere from 1949/50
(Zemsky, Berzin, Mikhalyev & Tormosov, 1995). The earlier official
figures submitted by the USSR were substantially falsified to conceal large
scale violations of the international regulations. Such evidence has reinforced
the need for the establishment of totally credible inspection and international
observation schemes for any future whaling activities. 1972 saw the implementation
of the IWC’s International Observer Scheme, whereby observers appointed
by the IWC and reporting directly to it were stationed at the whaling operations
of the member states to confirm their compliance with the agreed whaling
regulations (IWC, 1974, pp. 27-8). The quality of the Soviet official records
improved after this time when compared with the original records collected
on the whaling vessels.
The IWC is currently discussing an appropriate framework for new supervision
and control procedures. A Working Group which met in Mexico in May 1994,
Norway in January 1995, Ireland in May 1995, and the UK in June 1996, continues
to try and resolve the various issues involved, which include consideration
of questions of national sovereignty, independent verification, and reporting
requirements.
Some governments would like international inspection and controls to extend from the initial surveys and analyses on which whale stock estimates are based, through the actual catching and processing operations at sea or on shore, to the distribution of the products in the marketing phase of the industry. Others believe that a less comprehensive approach is required, and in particular that the trade aspect is more properly the responsibility of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (IWC, 1996, p.26).
Revision of the convention
A Convention signed in 1946 is clearly a reflection of attitudes and understanding
which may well have developed and changed over the intervening decades.
Even before the recent adoption in the context of the United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea of the current concepts of coastal state sovereignty
and the precautionary principle of management, there had been profound
changes in the interpretation and application of the 1946 whaling Convention
and the consequent management policies by which it is implemented.
There have been three major attempts to revise the 1946 Convention in the past 20 years. In 1974 the USA submitted a draft protocol to amend the Convention and the Commission established a Working Group of interested member nations to discuss the problems posed to the present Convention “Taking into account the changes which have occurred in whaling and stocks of cetaceans since 1946 and bearing in mind the necessity to strengthen the mechanism for the international conservation of whales and their rational management both at present and in the future; recognizing that the discussions in the Law of the Seas Conference may affect the activities of the IWC” (IWC 1976, p. 32).
A revised text and amendments proposed by different countries by postal communication were collated into a single document for discussion. This was the basic negotiating text considered at a preparatory meeting convened by the Government of Denmark in Copenhagen in July 1978 when alternative texts were developed (IWC 1980, p. 32).
Portugal (not a member of the IWC) then extended an invitation for a Drafting Group to meet in Estoril in November 1979, but this group was able to agree on a text for only the Preamble, the first and part of the second Articles (IWC 1981, p. 28).
A third meeting was hosted by the Government of Iceland in Reykjavik in May 1981 to improve and update the Convention. This had been rather more successful because the discussions had not been concerned with wording but the principles involved. However, there was still no overall consensus on the key issues of the object and purpose of the Convention, jurisdiction (species and areas), membership and decision taking. The Commission agreed to leave the matter as it was for the time being (IWC, 1982, p.34).
CURRENT INTERPRETATIONS
The tensions between the objectives of the conservation of the whale resources and the orderly development of the whaling industry continue today. Some governments, such as Iceland, Japan and Norway, argue for a resumption of commercial whaling as an example of sustainable development of the resource now that the scientific aspects of a revised management procedure have been agreed. Others, including Australia, France, Germany, Netherlands, UK and USA, taking a more protectionist position and are reluctant to do anything which could lead to a repetition of the past over-catching of whales.
The movement towards restriction, and eventual prohibition, of all whaling can be traced very clearly through the meetings of the IWC since 1972. In that year the UN Conference on the Human Environment met in Stockholm, Sweden and adopted a three point Resolution recommending the strengthening of the IWC, increased international research efforts, and calling for an agreement involving all governments concerned in a ten year moratorium on commercial whaling. The proposal for a global moratorium was rejected by the Commission at its meeting, but actions to implement the other two elements were approved (IWC, 1974, pp.23-6).
The individuals, organisations and governments active in working for a cessation of whaling over the following years gradually achieved the introduction of progressively lower catch limits, the prohibition of pelagic whaling except for minke whales and the establishment of the Indian Ocean Sanctuary in 1979 (IWC, 1980, pp.26-7), and finally the setting of zero catch limits for all commercial whaling adopted in 1982 with effect from 1986 (IWC, 1983, pp.20-1).
Since achieving this position, there has been a reluctance to consider any resumption of commercial whaling despite appropriate scientific justification in terms of stock abundance estimates and the development of the Revised Management Procedure, on the grounds that other factors must also be settled first. These include adequate inspection and observation schemes, discussed above, and humane killing. Indeed, the Commission has since put in place the Southern Ocean Sanctuary as a further limit on commercial whaling (IWC, 1995a, pp. 27-9).
Whale sanctuaries
As well as management measures governing catch and size limits, species
and seasons, the IWC may also designate open and closed areas for whaling.
Even before the 1946 Convention a Sanctuary in the Antarctic was established
by the majority of whaling nations in 1938 south of 40½ S between
longitudes 70½ W and 160½ W. The original reason for this
was that in this sector commercial whaling had not hitherto been prosecuted
and it was thought highly desirable that the immunity which whales in this
area had enjoyed should be maintained. This sanctuary was continued by
the IWC from its inception until 1955, when the area was opened initially
for three years and then continuously as a means of reducing the pressure
of catches on the rest of the Antarctic whaling grounds (Tønnessen
& Johnsen, 1982, pp. 563-5).
The Indian Ocean Sanctuary was established by the IWC in 1979, extending south to 55½S latitude, as an area where commercial whaling is prohibited. This provision was an initiative of the newly joined Government of the Seychelles to provide freedom from disturbance for ecosystems and for species or groups of animals, especially for activities such as breeding. The Seychelles stated that its proposal satisfied the ecological coherence of the area and the expressed opinions of several neighbouring countries. (IWC, 1980, p. 27). The Indian Ocean Sanctuary was initially established for 10 years and its duration has since been extended twice. It will be reviewed again by the IWC at its Annual Meeting in the year 2002 (IWC, 1993, p. 27).
At its 1992 Meeting the IWC received a proposal from France for the establishment of a whale sanctuary in the Southern Hemisphere south of 40½S. The purpose of the proposal was stated to be to contribute to the rehabilitation of the Antarctic marine ecosystem and the protection of all Southern Hemisphere species and populations of baleen whales and the sperm whale on their feeding grounds. This would also link up with the Indian Ocean Sanctuary to provide a large area within which whales would be free from commercial catching (Government of France, 1993). Following debate, France decided to defer consideration of the proposal to the 1993 Annual Meeting.
An IWC Working Group examined the matter over the next two years and at the 46th (1994) Annual Meeting the IWC adopted the Southern Ocean Sanctuary as another area in which commercial whaling is prohibited. The northern boundary of this Sanctuary follows the 40½S parallel of latitude except in the Indian Ocean sector where it joins the southern boundary of that sanctuary at 55½S, and around South America and into the South Pacific where the boundary is at 60½S. This prohibition will be reviewed ten years after its initial adoption and at succeeding ten year intervals, and could be revised at such times by the IWC (IWC, 1995a, p. 28).
Humane killing
A number of governments are expressing increasing concern over the question
of humane killing in the whaling context. The IWC has urged that its members
continue to promote the development of humane killing methods. During the
past ten years both Japan and Norway have made major improvements in their
whale killing technology. This includes advances in the triggering mechanism
for the explosive grenades used in the minke whale hunts, and the introduction
of an improved explosive material, penthrite, which has greater power than
the traditional black powder. These improvements are such that they are
now also being introduced into the aboriginal subsistence whaling hunts
in Alaska and Greenland (IWC, 1995a, pp. 15-16). Any assessment of the
efficiency, usually measured by the time to death in the whaling operations,
relies on a rather subjective indication of insensibility and death. There
is still a need to relate the cause of death to the observed time to death,
as well as the collection of information on the physiological status of
hunted animals.
A Workshop on Whale Killing Methods was held in the UK in June 1992 and
was re-convened in Ireland in May 1995 to review and evaluate progress
on the action plan it adopted, and to review the use of the electric lance
as a secondary method for killing whales. A proposal to ban the use of
the electric lance, which is employed as a secondary killing method in
the Japanese Antarctic minke whale fishery, failed to receive a sufficient
majority when it was discussed at the 1996 Annual Meeting of the Commission
because of the conflicting evidence, and a Working Group to examine the
scientific issues will meet in 1997 (IWC, 1997).
THE FUTURE
Whalewatching
A major new development is the IWC’s involvement in whalewatching
as a sustainable use of cetacean resources. In 1993 the IWC invited Contracting
Governments to undertake a preliminary assessment of the extent, and economic
and scientific value of whalewatching activities. These reports on the
value and potential of whalewatching were consolidated by the Secretariat
and considered by a Working Group at the 1994 meeting (IWC, 1995a, p. 32).
As a result the IWC has reaffirmed its interest in the subject, encouraged
some scientific work and adopted a series of objectives and principles
for managing whalewatching proposed by the Scientific Committee. In 1996
it adopted a Resolution which underlined the IWC’s future role in
monitoring and advising on the subject (IWC, 1997).
The environment and whale stocks
With increasing awareness that whales should not be considered apart from
the marine environment which they inhabit, and that detrimental changes
may threaten whale stocks, the IWC decided that the Scientific Committee
should give priority to research on the effects of environmental changes
on cetaceans. The Scientific Committee examined this issue in the context
of the Revised Management Procedure and agreed the RMP adequately addresses
such concerns. However, it went on to state that the species most vulnerable
to such threats might well be those reduced to levels at which the RMP,
even if applied, would result in zero catches (IWC, 1995b, pp. 55-9). The
Scientific Committee has held two workshops, one on the effects of chemical
pollutants in March 1995 in Norway, and another on the effects of climate
change and ozone depletion in March 1996 in the USA. The IWC has adopted
Resolutions reaffirming its view of the importance of these matters and
encouraging the Scientific Committee to increase collaboration and cooperation
with governmental, regional and other international organisations working
on related issues (IWC, 1997).
OTHER ASPECTS
North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission
Iceland and Norway have stated in recent meetings of the IWC that since
that body seems reluctant to allow the resumption of commercial whaling,
it might be necessary for them to turn to alternative fora where the issues
of catch limits can be discussed. Iceland in fact withdrew from the Convention
in 1992. In this context the newly established North Atlantic Marine Mammal
Commission, comprising government representatives from the Faroe Islands,
Greenland, Iceland and Norway is relevant. The United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea does not specify which international body, or even
if there is to be only one body, is the appropriate organisation through
which coastal states are to co-operate with respect to the management and
conservation of the whale resources (Article 65). However, the Agenda 21
Oceans Chapter adopted at the United Nations Conference on Environment
and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 does recognise the responsibility
of the IWC for this role, whilst not precluding regional agreements (paragraph
17.90).
Certainly the precedent for regional bodies to oversee the whaling activities of coastal states in particular parts of the world is not new. The governments of Chile, Ecuador and Peru formed the Permanent Commission of the Conference on the Use and Conservation of the Marine Resources of the South Pacific in 1952. They established catch regulations broadly similar to those in force for the IWC at that time. Subsequently all those governments have joined the IWC - Chile and Peru in 1979, and Ecuador in 1991, although the latter withdrew again in 1994.
Scientific research catches
The 1946 Convention allows any member government to grant a special permit
for the taking of whales for scientific research purposes. In response
to proposals to issue permits since the moratorium decision on commercial
whaling the IWC has established detailed guidelines for its Scientific
Committee to review and comment on such proposed permits (IWC, 1987, p.25;
1988, p.27; 1996, pp. 46-7). The IWC may also make recommendations to the
governments concerned although it has no power to forbid or rescind the
issue of a permit.
Iceland, while it was still a member of the IWC, carried out a four-year programme of research on the biology, genetics and ecological role of the whales in its waters from 1986 to 1989, taking 292 fin whales and 70 sei whales. The Commission passed Resolutions asking Iceland to reconsider and refrain from this activity (IWC, 1988, p.28; 1989, pp.30-1; 1990, p. 35).
Norway carried out a seven-year research programme started in 1988 to study and monitor minke whales in the Northeast Atlantic, including investigations on feeding ecology, age determination and aspects related to energetics. This was part of a broader ecological programme designed to provide information for future multi-species management in the Barents Sea. The IWC has regularly adopted Resolutions each year inviting Norway to reconsider the lethal takes (e.g. IWC, 1989, p.30; 1995a, p.48), which amounted to 289 whales.
Following two years of feasibility studies starting in the 1987/88 season to resolve the problems of collecting representative samples, Japan has embarked on a long-term research programme in the Antarctic which includes an annual catch of 300 or 400 ± 10% minke whales to estimate the biological parameters which could be used for management, in particular natural mortality, and the elucidation of the role of whales in the Antarctic ecosystem. The IWC again regularly adopts a Resolution each year inviting Japan to reconsider this research programme (e.g. IWC, 1988, p.29; 1997), to which the Japanese authorities always give serious consideration and a reasoned response.
Japan also initiated in 1994 a programme to clarify the stock structure and mixing rates of minke whales around its coasts, based on problems encountered by the Scientific Committee in trying to assess the Northwestern Pacific stocks. The take is of 100 animals each year, and the IWC regularly asks Japan to reconsider this programme (IWC, 1995a, p. 47; 1997).
Many countries over the years have issued permits to allow limited catches of whales which would not otherwise be sampled in the normal commercial operations, such as lactating females, under-sized animals or protected species, in order to advance scientific knowledge. However, one aspect of the current research catches which has created some concern is the requirement in Article VIII paragraph 2 of the 1946 Convention that the whales taken “shall so far as practicable be processed”. In the situation that commercial whaling is currently prohibited, the suspicion has been that the present catches are a way of circumventing the ban or of maintaining the whaling operations until there is a full resumption. Whatever is the truth, it has to be said that useful results from these research activities are being presented to the Scientific Committee, even if the objectives of some of the research fall outside the guidelines adopted by the IWC.
CONCLUSION
Commercial whaling has a long history of over-exploitation of each species and stock of whales as they were discovered or the technology advanced to permit capture. No regulations have been successful in preventing this in the face of the economic pressures from the industry.
The current scientific work on the comprehensive assessment of whale stocks and a revised management procedure have now reached the point where catch limits for commercial whaling on certain stocks can be calculated using the agreed procedure which has been rigorously tested by computer simulation, and requires a minimum of data. But the IWC has not yet considered setting catch limits other than zero, because there are still concerns to be satisfied over the safeguards, including adequate inspection, international observation, data reporting and monitoring, which are considered necessary by some nations to be built into a full revised management scheme. The problems of humane killing also remain to be resolved.
The uncertainties involved in whale stock assessment, management and regulation have only served to reinforce the views of those people and nations who are opposed to a resumption of commercial whaling of the need for a large sanctuary to provide a pool of whales which are sure to be safe from hunting.
Against this position it is argued by governments such as Norway, which has lodged objections to the ban on commercial whaling and licences its nationals to take limited catches, that some whale stocks undoubtedly could sustain carefully regulated and controlled catches. In addition, and as discussed in another paper to this conference, certain coastal communities would like to resume their traditional whaling activities which are at present banned by the moratorium on commercial whaling. These communities have society structures and traditions similar to others which are allowed to continue hunting whales under the IWC’s aboriginal subsistence whaling provisions.
Public opinion in some parts of the developed world seems increasingly to regard cetaceans as ‘special’ animals which should not be hunted for the products which they yield but seen more as a focus for whalewatching, educational programmes and aesthetic values. This gives rise to a clash of cultures with hunting communities concerning the responsible use of this resource.
It may be that the final solution will be to establish total protection from hunting for whales throughout the greater part of the world’s oceans, but to permit limited and carefully monitored catches by traditional and cultural operations within the 200 nautical miles EEZs of those countries with communities wishing to maintain and continue these activities. Such a policy may well reflect the economic realities as well as the aspirations of both the consumers and the conservation interests in today’s world (Gambell, 1990, pp.41-2). Given the flexibility of interpretation of the 1946 Convention which has occurred over the past half century, it is not certain that a new Convention would necessarily be needed to enshrine such a policy in international law. It really depends on the collective will of the member nations of the IWC as they face this particular challenge of the new millennium.
REFERENCES
ANNEX - WHALE POPULATION ESTIMATES
(rounded to the third significant figure of the upper confidence limit)
Because of the considerable scientific uncertainty over the numbers of whales of different species and in different geographical stocks the International Whaling Commission decided in 1989 that it would be better not to give whale population figures except for those species/stocks which have been assessed in detail, and for which there is statistical certainty with respect to the numbers.
| Population | Year | Size | 95% Confidence interval |
| MINKE WHALES Southern Hemisphere |
1982/83 -1988/89 | 761,000 | 510,000 - 1,140,000 |
| North Atlantic (excluding Canadian East Coast area) | 1987-95 | Approx. 149,000 (subject to slight revision) | Approx.120,000 - 182,000 |
| North Pacific (North West Pacific and Okhotsk Sea) | 1989-90 | 25,000 | 2,800 - 48,600 |
| Population | Year | Size | 95% Confidence interval |
| FIN WHALES North Atlantic |
1969-89 | 47,300 | 27,700 - 82,000 |
| SEI WHALES Central North Atlantic |
1989 | 10,300 | 6,100 - 17,700 |
| GRAY WHALES | 1987/88 | 21,000 | 19,800 - 22,500 |
| Assuming a constant rate of increase, the population was increasing at a rate of 3.2% (95% confidence interval 2.4% - 4.3%) over the period 1967/68 - 1987/88 with an average annual catch of 174 whales. | |||
| BOWHEAD WHALES Bering-Chukchi- Beaufort Seas stock |
1988 | 7,500 | 6,400 - 9,200 |
| The net rate of increase of this population from 1978 to 1988 has been estimated as 2.3% per year (95% confidence interval 0.9% - 3.4%). | |||
| HUMPBACK WHALES Western North Atlantic |
1979-86 | 5,500 | 8,120 - 2,890 |
| A rate of population increase of 10.3% (95% confidence interval 2% - 23%) was obtained from the Gulf of Maine. | |||
| BLUE WHALES Southern Hemisphere |
1985/86-1990/91 | 460 | 210 - 1,000 |
| PILOT WHALES Central & Eastern North Atlantic |
1989 | 780,000 | 440,000 - 1,370,000 |
ABSTRACT
The 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling was drawn up to control the catching operations of a particular fishery. It embodies such current ideals as wise use and sustainable development, and established the International Whaling Commission which can amend the whaling regulations. As the term ‘whale’ is not defined. some governments believe the Convention applies to all cetaceans, while others restrict it to just the great whales. However, it is agreed that the Scientific Committee can provide advice on the small cetaceans.
Since 1986 the IWC has banned commercial whaling while the Scientific Committee
carries out a comprehensive assessment of the status and trends of the
whale stocks. This has seen the development of rigorous survey techniques
and analyses, and a Revised Management Procedure for baleen whales. Before
this is implemented the Commission has to agree on effective monitoring,
inspection and observation schemes.
Attempts to revise the Convention have failed due to differences of opinion
over the purpose and scope of a new instrument. In the meantime the provisions
of the present Convention have been used to progressively lower catch limits
for commercial whaling to zero, establish the Indian Ocean and Southern
Ocean Sanctuaries, and promote more humane killing methods. New interests
now include whalewatching and environmental impacts on whale stocks.
The formation of an alternative body by nations wishing to resume whaling
and the continuation of small catches for scientific research purposes
puts pressure on the IWC to accommodate the views of people who have a
tradition of sustainable harvesting in coastal waters as well as those
who regard whales as animals to be protected. It may be that both positions
can be achieved under the present Convention.