Source: High North Web - News section. Dec. 19, 1996.
Norway must expect to meet opposition to it's proposal to downlist the North East and Central Atlantic minke whale stocks at the CITES meeting next summer. Comments received from the individual members of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), forwarded by the Commission's secretariate, express the view that CITES should respect the IWC moratorium on commercial whaling and therefore keep all the great whales,including minkes, on Appendix I.
Some biological arguments were also put forward. The New Zealand IWC Commissioner writes that Norway's claim that the stocks in question are not threatened with extinction "is debatable" and that "uncertainty still exists regarding the size of these whale stocks". More specifically New Zealand stresses the "varied estimates of stock abundance of Northeast Atlantic minke whales over the past six years."
However, the South-African member of the Scientific Committee, Dr. Best, writes in his comment that "on biological grounds there seems no reason why these stocks of minke whales should not be transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II, as they cannot be considered endangered with extinction." Dr. Best was the only member of the IWC Scientific Committee to comment on the Norwegian proposal. The IWC Scientific Committee agreed last year on a North East Atlantic minke whale stock estimate of 112 000*. Best's view is in accordance with the evaluation of the status minke whales made by the IUCN and reflected in it's "Red List of Threatened Animals".
The Australian IWC commissioner, Peter Bridgewater, who also serves as IWC Chairman, writes in his comment that "no estimate for the Central North Atlantic stock has been agreed". This statement is contradicted by the fact that the Chairman's report from the 42nd IWC-meeting states that: "The (IWC) Scientific Committee accepted an estimate of 28,000 (approximate 95% CI 21,600-31,400) as the best estimate of the number of minke whales in the Central stock area."
Both Australia and New Zealand write that any downlisting would undermine the IWC moratorium and thus the IWC's authority. "The Norwegian minke whale catch is not covered by the IWC moratorium due to the Norwegian reservation. This reservation is authorized in the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling and nobody has ever challenged its legality. Therefore a downlisting of these two stocks cannot and will not undermine the moratorium", says Georg Blichfeldt, secretary of the High North Alliance, to the High North Web News. "Should CITES reject the proposal for downlisting on the basis of the moratorium, then this would be in contravention of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. It would be a denial of Norway's rights under the Whaling Convention", adds Blichfeldt.
The United States puts forward the same line of arguments and writes that "CITES has agreed to reflect IWC decisions in its Appendices". According to the US, this agreement was established in 1983 when CITES declared in a resolution that "All cetaceans for which the catches are regulated by the IWC and for which the Commission has set catch limits for commercial whaling ... and not already on Appendix I would be transferred to that Appendix in 1986, when the IWC decision to implement a pause in commercial whaling comes into effect."
It may be argued that what the US considers to be agreement to reflect IWC decisions, is merely a CITES decision regarding when the transfers to Appendix I should take place, and does not address the circumstances in which any prospective downlisting should occur. Nor does it take into consideration specific catches taken under legal reservations to the moratorium. Furthermore, a new set of listing criteria has been implemented since the resolution was adopted.
High North Alliance secretary, Georg Blichfeldt, says that, "Such opposition to downlisting, based on the IWC moratorium on commercial whaling, raises fundamental questions regarding CITES' position as an independent international body. CITES' purpose is to regulate international trade in endangered species. This means that CITES must base any listings on biological criteria and an objective evaluation of the consequences of trade, and not on political decisions based on ethical and moral objectives made by other political bodies who have neglected their management responsibilities."
The comments forwarded by the IWC Secretariate came from France, USA, UK, New Zealand, Switzerland and Australia.
* An international group of scientists appointed by the Scientific Committee of the IWC reached in 1996 consensus on an estimate of 112,000 minke whales in the Northeast Atlantic. The estimate was consequently endorsed by a unanimous Scientific Committee. It is based on a new line transect survey which was carried out in 1995. The international group of scientists also recalculated the estimate from the 1988/89 survey. The new figure of 65,000 was also endorsed by the Scientific Committee. The international group of scientists noted that the estimates from the 1995 survey and the 1988/89 survey are not directly comparable owing to differences in methodology. The Scientific Committee report notes that the estimate from the 1995 survey is "a more reliable estimate" than that resulting from the 1988/89 survey. The Scientific Committee also gives other reasons why the 1988/89 estimate could be seriously downward biased, but notes that "a natural rate of increase" is a very likely factor involved in accounting for at least some of the difference between the two estimates.