Whaling Commission Urged to Join Battle to Halt Killing of Dolphins

When delegates to the International Whaling Commission assemble in San Diego this week, they will grapple with the perennial opposition of Japan and several other countries to the worldwide ban on commercial whaling.

But a new issue is expected to emerge at the commission’s annual meeting, which is being held in the United States for the first time since 1971. Members of Greenpeace, Earth Island Institute and other animal protection groups want the commission to take on the tuna fishing industry for killing thousands of dolphins each year. The highly evolved mammals die when they become ensnared in the fishermen’s nets.

‘Dolphin-Killing Capital of the World’

The activists call San Diego, a center for tuna fishing, the “dolphin-killing capital of the world” and plan to hold press conferences and stage dockside demonstrations throughout the week.

“There is no regulatory or governing body on the planet for small cetaceans,” said Samuel F. LaBudde, a San Francisco research biologist who works with Earth Island Institute, an activist group. The activists argue that the commission, which watches over the world population of whales, classified as large cetaceans, could also inject itself into the controversy over the widespread killing of dolphins, which are small cetaceans.

LaBudde gained notice about 18 months ago when he returned from a four-month undercover stint as a tuna boat worker and showed graphic videotape of dying dolphins. “The way they catch them is incredible,” LaBudde said. “They hunt them down with helicopters, speedboats and explosives, bomb them into submission, then set mile-long nets around them to catch them.”

Tuna fishermen sometimes seek out dolphins because tuna are known to congregate near the mammals. Explosives are used to herd the dolphins away from the tuna and into nets designed to prevent injuries. However, frequently these measures fail.

“People aren’t really aware of the fact that these tuna boats down here are killing 20 (thousand) or 30,000 dolphins a year, and that’s just the U.S. part of the fleet,” LaBudde said.

Financial Impact Cited

American tuna industry spokesmen respond that they already rescue a large proportion of the dolphins caught in their nets and it is unlikely that much further improvement can be made without financially devastating their industry.

The whaling commission did some preliminary work on the dolphin issue last year, but it is unclear whether its members will be willing to take on another politically and economically sensitive issue at a time when controversies over whaling are far from ended.

If there is a pariah among the scientists, delegates and activists gathering in San Diego this year, it is Kazuo Shima, the representative from Japan.

He is not alone in his opposition to the commission’s ban on commercial whaling, but he expects little support from the representatives of the 37 other nations, who will spend the week determining how many whales may be killed in the next year and for what purpose.

Clash of 2 Cultures Seen

“When you look at the history of the IWC, you will see that the membership (has) been constituted of nations having the culture of the land animal, the meat culture,” Shima said in an interview last week. The Japanese culture features a diet based on marine resources, he said, and as a result there is a “clash of cultures” on the whaling commission. “We are the minority and within the IWC the minority always (gets) the unfavorable decision,” Shima said. “One thing I am sure of is that ethnocentrism--thinking that yours is the only culture and people must change their culture to come into accord with yours--is very dangerous thinking.”

The chief public attack against the Japanese position comes from Greenpeace, which has about 120 representatives in town from the Unites States and several other countries.

Campbell Plowden, whale campaign coordinator for Greenpeace, said the critical decisions facing the whaling conference this year are the “research” whaling conducted by Japan, Iceland and Norway despite the worldwide ban on whaling and an attempt by Japan to win an exemption that would permit whaling in four coastal villages, for cultural end ethnic reasons.

After decades of controversy and opposition from Japan, the whaling commission in 1982 approved a moratorium on all commercial whaling and the ban took effect in 1986. However, using what Greenpeace calls a “loophole,” Japan, Iceland and Norway have been conducting “research whaling” for scientific purposes. Last year, Japanese whalers killed 241 whales under the research exception and Norway and Iceland less than 100 each.

Research Claims Rejected

The commission has ruled at past meetings that the research is not scientifically valid and has recommended that the programs be halted. However, the commission has no real authority to enforce any of its decisions. In fact, Japan agreed to abide by the commercial ban only because U.S. officials threatened to retaliate by terminating lucrative fishing rights.

“We very much want the commission to again pass resolutions rejecting the scientific validity of the research programs of Iceland, Japan and Norway,” Plowden said. At closed meetings before the formal commission sessions, Japan submitted a new proposal calling for the killing of 875 whales for research purposes, he said. Iceland probably will propose 90 research killings and Norway 20, he said.

“In Japan whale meat is primarily meat for human consumption,” rather than for scientific purposes, Plowden said. “They have developed a taste for it and it has become quite a luxury item.”

Similarly, Japan’s request on behalf of small coastal whaling operations is bogus, he said.

If the exception is permitted for Japan, the moratorium on commercial whaling would “totally unravel” within a short period of time, Plowden said.

Shima and his entourage, including an American public relations spokesman, say the Japanese research is valid. They say it is necessary to catch and kill a random sampling of whales in order to determine whether populations are increasing or decreasing.

Shima said the culture and survival of the four coastal communities depends on their ability to capture whales, as they have done for a thousand years.

Sanctuary Status at Issue

Also before the commission is a decision on whether to extend the sanctuary status of a large area of the Indian Ocean, where whaling has been prohibited for 10 years. Japan opposes the continuation of the Indian Ocean sanctuary.

Despite the criticism and generally negative public opinion around the globe, Shima said Japan remains firm in its opposition to blanket controls on the industry.

“In Japan it’s like a crusade of the Japanese cause,” he said. “It is not true that every species (of whale) is endangered and every species is depleted to the level where there’s no recovery. We’re always hopeful. We never give up.”