The fluke of a whale

By: Ali Ismail

0778-842 5262 (United Kingdom)

aliismail_uk@yahoo.co.uk

WHALING - A MATTER FOR THE HUMAN CONSCIENCE


Whale hunting is a European and Japanese near-monopoly


Of all the matters concerning man’s exploits on the high seas the subject of whaling seems to concern Europeans more than Asians or Africans. In fact among the nations of South Asia only Indonesia has a whaling industry and, other than that, Japan is the only Asian nation that hunts whales.

The first thing to note, I suppose, is that whalers are not fishermen because whales are not fish. They are mammals and survive by breathing air. It just happens that they reside permanently in the watery wildernesses of the Earth’s oceans and are among the largest living creatures of which this planet can boast.

Exactly why countries such as India, Bangladesh and Pakistan do not hunt whales may be hidden in our collective psychologies, in our race souls so to speak. It could be that many of us have an instinctive terror of the deep or that the kind of activity in which there are almost no reliable rules and one has to direct one’s actions independently of external directions is uncongenial to us, or something else.

At any rate the part of the world whence we originate does not possess a whaling industry worthy of the name and is not likely to venture in that direction in the near future.

One feature of whaling is that most people, especially Europeans, are influenced by the epic novel of whaling: Moby Dick by Herman Melville. It may be dangerous to be guided by a work of fiction in a real life matter, but there it is.

For what it is worth generations of American and European children had their senses of the romance of the high seas shaped by the adventures, or should I say misadventures, of Captain Ahab and his pursuit of the great white whale which had previously dined on his leg, to get his revenge.

Here, by way of illustration, almost at random is an extract from near the start of Moby Dick: “Chief among these motives was the overwhelming idea of the great whale himself. Such a portentous and mysterious monster roused all my curiosity. Then the wild and distant seas where he rolled his island bulk; the undeliverable, nameless perils of the whale; these, with all the attending marvels of a thousand Patagonian sights and sounds, helped to sway me to my wish. With other men, perhaps, such things would not have been inducements; but as for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas, and land on barbarous coasts. Not ignoring what is good, I am quick to perceive a horror, and could still be social with it- would they let me- since it is but well to be on friendly terms with all the inmates of the place one lodges in.”
And from about the middle of the epic the infamous Sermon to the Sharks: “Sullenly taking the offered lantern, old Fleece limped across the deck to the bulwarks; and then, with one hand dropping his light low over the sea, so as to get a good view of his congregation, with the other hand he solemnly flourished his tongs, and leaning far over the side in a mumbling voice began addressing the sharks, while Stubb, softly crawling behind, overheard all that was said.
"Fellow-critters: I'se ordered here to say dat you must stop dat dam noise dare. you hear? stop dat dam smackin' ob de lip! massa Stubb say dat you can fill your dam bellies up to de hatchings, but by Gor! you must stop dat dam racket!"
You know, the very first time I got involved in politics was when I wrote a letter of protest to some international body about the cruelties of the whaling industry decades ago.
Now, whenever whaling is covered in the conventional media it is usually in the context of some kind of confrontation between people who want to get wealthy out of killing whales and those who want to conserve their gigantic relatives and up their numbers.
The anti-whaling side of the argument often argues that the killed whales are those that are most curious about boats and thus the easiest to approach and kill. However, these individuals are also the most valuable to the whale-watching industry in coastal areas, as these "friendly" whales provide the easiest means of providing an experience to their customers.
The argument over whether whales are worth more dead than alive is complex and unresolved. The whale-watching industry, and those opposed to whaling on moral grounds, claim that once all benefits to local economies such as hotels, restaurants and other tourist amenities are factored in, and the fact that a whale can only be killed once but watched many times, the economic balance weighs firmly down on the side of not hunting whales.
This economic argument is a particular bone of contention in Iceland, which has amongst the most-developed whale-watching operations in the world and where the hunting of minke whales began again in August 2003. The argument is less applicable to Antarctic waters as minke whales are more abundant there, and there are far fewer whale-watching cruises.
Many developing countries such as Brazil, Argentina and South Africa argue that whalewatching, a growing billion-dollar industry, provides more revenue and more equitable distribution of profits than the possible resumption of commercial whaling by pelagic fleets from far-away developed countries.
These countries are defending their right to the non-lethal use of whale resources and refuse to bow down to the pressures of the whaling industry to allow the resumption of commercial whaling in their regions.
Aside from Indonesia, no country in the Southern Hemisphere is currently whaling or intends to, and proposals to permanently forbid whaling South of the Equator are defended by the abovementioned developing countries plus Peru, Uruguay, Australia, and New Zealand, which all strongly object to the continuation of Japanese whaling in the Antarctic.
The pro-whaling side claims that the debate is moot. They point out that the anti whaling argument implies that hunt is done on an unsustainable basis and the context of the debate itself is slanted toward anti-whaling rhetoric.
Whalers argue that if whales are hunted on a sustainable basis, the argument that the whale-watching industry and the whaling industry are in competition is invalid. Whales are the largest animals in the world and a single whale provides more meat than any other animal.
Whaling and its associated activities continue to provide employment and economic stimulants for fisheries, logistic, restaurant and related industries, they say.
Moreover, for the poorer whaling nations, the need for the resumption of whaling is more pressing. Horace Walters, of the Eastern Caribbean Cetacean Commission stated: "We have islands which may want to start whaling again - it's expensive to import food from the developed world, and we believe there's a deliberate attempt to keep us away from our resources so we continue to develop those countries' economies by importing from them."
Perhaps the highest body concerned with this unusual industry is the International Whaling Commission (IWC) in Cambridge, England.
The IWC was set up under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling which was signed in Washington DC on 2nd December 1946 The purpose of the convention is to provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry.
The main duty of the IWC is to keep under review and revise as necessary the measures laid down in the schedule to the convention which govern the conduct of whaling throughout the world
These measures, among other things, provide for: the complete protection of certain species; designate specified areas as “whale sanctuaries”; set limits on the numbers and size of whales which may be taken; prescribe open and closed seasons and areas for whaling; and prohibit the capture of suckling calves and female whales accompanied by calves. The compilation of catch reports and other statistical and biological records are also required.
Regular readers of this organ’s international pages will know that quarrels about whaling in Antarctic waters feature from time to time.
In the early and mid-1900's, several species of whales in the Southern Ocean were hunted to the edge of extinction, but they are now gradually recovering thanks to international regulation. However, the great abundance of whales in the Antarctic region remains something from the past.
Today the entire area around the continent of Antarctica has been declared an international whale sanctuary with whaling activities closely monitored by the IWC.
Greenpeace has this to say: “Wherever whaling has been practised it has devastated populations of whales. When the International Whaling Commission (IWC) was formed in 1946, its preamble noted that 'the history of whaling has seen overfishing 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 overfishing'.
“But despite this clear recognition of the problem the IWC was unable to stop it, instead presiding over the decimation of species after species. It is still not known if some species will ever recover, even after decades of protection.”
Chris of Lerwick says from the heart: “I don’t like it. I think its cruel. I certainly think it’s horrible.”
Meanwhile, this organ, while I still have a hand in its international pages, will faithfully follow future confrontations in the Southern Oceans between the pro and anti whaling factions.

THE END

This article was published in the 12th October 2006 issue of the Bangla Mirror, the first English language weekly for the United Kingdom's Bangladeshis - read everywhere from the Arctic to the sub-Antarctic.