Japan admits disaster funds to be used for whaling

R P McMurphy · 12-12-2011 11:28PM

Norwayviking wrote: »

What i am trying to say is hunting for whale have been going on since 3000BC.
And yes you have to kill something when you hunt,but i guess common sense isnt for you;)

So to clarify your position it is fine to make a mockery of an internationally agreed ban on commercial whaling because:
a) it has been going on a long time; and
b) the Japanese people would starve if they didn't get their whale meat.

Or do you think that it is primarily about scientific study?

Akrasia · 12-12-2011 11:28PM

I used to like whales but after that dodgy line out in last years 6 nations that cost us the triple crown and cost me 300 quid... ****em

Norwayviking · 12-12-2011 11:41PM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

So to clarify your position it is fine to make a mockery of an internationally agreed ban on commercial whaling because:
a) it has been going on a long time; and
b) the Japanese people would starve if they didn't get their whale meat.

Or do you think that it is primarily about scientific study?

a)There was never a ban on whaling,only on certain species of whale.The rest is regulated by quotas.And yes Japan have a long tradition in whaling,and it brings food on the table just like Beef does in Ireland.

b)Well i believe its for scientific study,how can you else know about the species of whale,and their numbers.

noxqs · 12-12-2011 11:42PM

Whale meat is delicious and whaling can be done in a sustainable manner (see iceland/faeroe islands). Sure looks brutal and may make PETA people cry, but if you see the inside of a modern day slaughter house its peanuts in comparison. And a whale/cow is probably around the same on the evolutionary ladder.

Whaling if done sustainably is OK. Ever had tuna in a can? Did you know for every 50 tunas killed, about 2-3 dolphins dies too?
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_safe_label)

World is a cruel, place. Let me know when we evolve photosynthesis so we can stop eating any other living organism. Until then, it's not a question of which animal we harvest for food, but how we go about doing it in a long term sustainable way.

R P McMurphy · 12-12-2011 11:49PM

Norwayviking wrote: »

a)There was never a ban on whaling,only on certain species of whale.The rest is regulated by quotas.And yes Japan have a long tradition in whaling,and it brings food on the table just like Beef does in Ireland.

b)Well i believe its for scientific study,how can you else know about the species of whale,and their numbers.

You are ill-informed.

There is an international ban on commercial whaling and this has been in place since 1986. This applies to all stocks

Only a complete fool would believe that the current quotas are caught purely for scientific purposes

R P McMurphy · 12-12-2011 11:51PM

noxqs wrote: »

Whale meat is delicious and whaling can be done in a sustainable manner (see iceland/faeroe islands). Sure looks brutal and may make PETA people cry, but if you see the inside of a modern day slaughter house its peanuts in comparison. And a whale/cow is probably around the same on the evolutionary ladder.

Whaling if done sustainably is OK. Ever had tuna in a can? Did you know for every 50 tunas killed, about 2-3 dolphins dies too?
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_safe_label)

World is a cruel, place. Let me know when we evolve photosynthesis so we can stop eating any other living organism. Until then, it's not a question of which animal we harvest for food, but how we go about doing it in a long term sustainable way.

Where did you get this break though piece of research, link?

noxqs · 12-12-2011 11:58PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minke_whale
Conservation status: Least Concern
(Homo Sapiens Sapiens (thats us) is in the same category).

Commercial whaling is banned but this is not set in stone as many whale species are not threatened and can be whaled sustainably. Iceland kills 30 whales per year and Faeroe Islands kills 950 whales per year - of long finned pilot whales (which is not classified properly yet in conservation status, they are not immediately threatened but may need more data/research as to better determine that).

I don't think whale meat should compete along side cows - since obviously - we can't farm them in the same way. But people seem to oppose it based on pictures and how cute whales look - there's nothing more annoying than people basing their opinions on looking at pictures. There's plenty of data to suggest modest whaling in Norway/Iceland/Faeroe Islands can be done sustainably. I'd oppose whaling too if there was data suggesting otherwise.

People get upset due to the pictures of whales being slaughtered on the beaches and the water turning red. If we applied the same criteria to other species no one would eat chicken, cow, pig, hell anything to cross a slaughter house assembly line.

P.S. Evolutionary ladder - they're both mammals which gestate for around the same period of time etc etc.

Norwayviking · 12-12-2011 11:59PM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

You are ill-informed.

There is an international ban on commercial whaling and this has been in place since 1986. This applies to all stocks

Only a complete fool would believe that the current quotas are caught purely for scientific purposes

Between 1986 and 1989 there was a ban yes.In 1993 commecial whaling was allowed again.The time between 1989-1993 was only for scientific purpose.;)
I think you need to check your resources,mate.:rolleyes:

R P McMurphy · 13-12-2011 12:06AM

Norwayviking wrote: »

Between 1986 and 1989 there was a ban yes.In 1993 commecial whaling was allowed again.The time between 1989-1993 was only for scientific purpose.;)
I think you need to check your resources,mate.:rolleyes:

I think you will find that you are wrong, there is a ban on commercial whaling and those that are currently killed are done so under the remit of scientific research although in practice it is for consumption and so makes a mockery of the ban

Norwayviking · 13-12-2011 12:11AM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

I think you will find that you are wrong, there is a ban on commercial whaling and those that are currently killed are done so under the remit of scientific research although in practice it is for consumption and so makes a mockery of the ban

.
Commercial whaling ceased for a five year period to allow a small scientific catch for gauging the stock's sustainability and resumed 1993.
Minke whales are the only legally hunted species. Catches have fluctuated between 487 animals in 2000 to 592 in 2007. For the year 2011 the quota is set at 1286 Minke whales.[23] The catch is made solely from the Northeast Atlantic minke whale population, which is estimated at 102,000.[24]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling

R P McMurphy · 13-12-2011 12:18AM

noxqs wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minke_whale
Conservation status: Least Concern
(Homo Sapiens Sapiens (thats us) is in the same category).

Commercial whaling is banned but this is not set in stone as many whale species are not threatened and can be whaled sustainably. Iceland kills 30 whales per year and Faeroe Islands kills 950 whales per year - of long finned pilot whales (which is not classified properly yet in conservation status, they are not immediately threatened but may need more data/research as to better determine that).

I don't think whale meat should compete along side cows - since obviously - we can't farm them in the same way. But people seem to oppose it based on pictures and how cute whales look - there's nothing more annoying than people basing their opinions on looking at pictures. There's plenty of data to suggest modest whaling in Norway/Iceland/Faeroe Islands can be done sustainably. I'd oppose whaling too if there was data suggesting otherwise.

People get upset due to the pictures of whales being slaughtered on the beaches and the water turning red. If we applied the same criteria to other species no one would eat chicken, cow, pig, hell anything to cross a slaughter house assembly line.

P.S. Evolutionary ladder - they're both mammals which gestate for around the same period of time etc etc.

It is disingenuous to suggest that the objection to commercial whaling is due to people looking at upsetting pictures. The fact is prior to the ban, tens of thousands of whales were slaughtered and brought some species to the brink of extinction. People were rightly outraged by this and if the international community had not acted then entire species could well have been wiped of the face of the earth. It is probably likely that a limited form of commercial whaling will commence at some stage. As you point out this could probably be targeted and done in a sustainable manner. Who will enforce it though, if it is to be self policing then it will not work as the Japanese government have acted in very bad faith in relation to the scientific status currently afforded

noxqs · 13-12-2011 12:27AM

The countries which would do whaling in the North Sea are very far from what they used to be. You'll find the inhabitants of Norway/Iceland/Faeroe Islands to be pretty concerned about ethics and sustainability too and their economies far from depend on whaling as they used to.

This isn't the 50es, 60es, 70es anymore - their population would be up in arms if whaling was threatening the whale population too.

I believe these countries would be able to do it in an honest, open and ethical way guided by proper studies and data to catch a sustainable amount. This isn't unscrupulous third world countries and AFAIK they have stuck to the quotas thus far without anyone questioning they were killing more than that.

Norwayviking · 13-12-2011 12:28AM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

It is disingenuous to suggest that the objection to commercial whaling is due to people looking at upsetting pictures. The fact is prior to the ban, tens of thousands of whales were slaughtered and brought some species to the brink of extinction. People were rightly outraged by this and if the international community had not acted then entire species could well have been wiped of the face of the earth. It is probably likely that a limited form of commercial whaling will commence at some stage. As you point out this could probably be targeted and done in a sustainable manner. Who will enforce it though, if it is to be self policing then it will not work as the Japanese government have acted in very bad faith in relation to the scientific status currently afforded

Yes and you have scientific proof of this:rolleyes:that the whale would be wiped out:rolleyes:
They said the same about the sealhunting in the 1990s,now the seals are overpopulated in large numbers,and they are thinking of lifting the ban there too;)

R P McMurphy · 13-12-2011 12:29AM

Norwayviking wrote: »

.
Commercial whaling ceased for a five year period to allow a small scientific catch for gauging the stock's sustainability and resumed 1993.
Minke whales are the only legally hunted species. Catches have fluctuated between 487 animals in 2000 to 592 in 2007. For the year 2011 the quota is set at 1286 Minke whales.[23] The catch is made solely from the Northeast Atlantic minke whale population, which is estimated at 102,000.[24]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling

Yes minke whales are legally caught under the guise of scientific research.

R P McMurphy · 13-12-2011 12:31AM

noxqs wrote: »

The countries which would do whaling in the North Sea are very far from what they used to be. You'll find the inhabitants of Norway/Iceland/Faeroe Islands to be pretty concerned about ethics and sustainability too and their economies far from depend on whaling as they used to.

This isn't the 50es, 60es, 70es anymore - their population would be up in arms if whaling was threatening the whale population too.

I believe these countries would be able to do it in an honest, open and ethical way guided by proper studies and data to catch a sustainable amount. This isn't unscrupulous third world countries and AFAIK they have stuck to the quotas thus far without anyone questioning they were killing more than that.

And as for Japan?

Norwayviking · 13-12-2011 12:34AM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

And as for Japan?

Japan is doing there scientific research like Norway\Iceland and Faroe Island does.;)

somefeen · 13-12-2011 12:34AM

Whaling is a lot more complicated than people seem to think and who the hell trust what greenpeace says anyway. They are constantly getting their facts wrong.

Over fishing of fish species is probably a much greater concern.

R P McMurphy · 13-12-2011 12:35AM

Norwayviking wrote: »

Yes and you have scientific proof of this:rolleyes:that the whale would be wiped out:rolleyes:
They said the same about the sealhunting in the 1990s,now the seals are overpopulated in large numbers,and they are thinking of lifting the ban there too;)

Scientific proof that if whaling commenced that whales would be wiped out? there would be a large number of factors that would influence that so how could their be scientific evidence now. There could be projections based on simulations but none that I am aware of. And will you stop using stupid faces unless you are five years of age, it is pretty pathetic

R P McMurphy · 13-12-2011 12:37AM

somefeen wrote: »

Whaling is a lot more complicated than people seem to think and who the hell trust what greenpeace says anyway. They are constantly getting their facts wrong.

Over fishing of fish species is probably a much greater concern.

Care to provide a case where Greenpeace have used incorrect data

Norwayviking · 13-12-2011 12:37AM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

And will you stop using stupid faces unless you are five years of age, it is pretty pathetic

Sorry its just common sense to me;)
I start thinking maybe you are around that age:eek:

vicwatson · 13-12-2011 12:37AM

Norwayviking wrote: »

it brings food on the table ....

b)Well i believe its for scientific study,how can you else know about the species of whale,and their numbers.

You mean it brings food to the (restaurant table) as they are killed for commercial purposes and sold commercially. Cows aren't near the cusp of extinction last I heard.

Killing them is not the answer to finding out their numbers as you suggest above... oh yeh lets kill them all and see how many we don't have left anymore :rolleyes:

vicwatson · 13-12-2011 12:38AM

Norwayviking wrote: »

Japan is doing there scientific research like Norway\Iceland and Faroe Island does.;)

Oh right, and they don't end up in restaurants then no? :mad:

somefeen · 13-12-2011 12:41AM

noxqs wrote: »

P.S. Evolutionary ladder - they're both mammals which gestate for around the same period of time etc etc.

Both ungulates I think

Norwayviking · 13-12-2011 12:43AM

vicwatson wrote: »

You mean it brings food to the (restaurant table) as they are killed for commercial purposes and sold commercially. Cows aren't near the cusp of extinction last I heard.

Killing them is not the answer to finding out their numbers as you suggest above... oh yeh lets kill them all and see how many we don't have left anymore :rolleyes:

Have you been in a slaughterhouse and seen the cattle slaughtered;)
And yes you have to kill to do scientific research:rolleyes:
I was in Norway last year hunting seal for scientific purpose
REASON because the seals carry parasites that effect the food chain,and when they come into the fjords in Norway,they will go for the fish in the fishfarms there.
I am sure you wont eat that here in Ireland either:rolleyes:

Norwayviking · 13-12-2011 12:45AM

vicwatson wrote: »

Oh right, and they don't end up in restaurants then no? :mad:

It would be a pity if it didnt,i am sure that same goes with cattle,but you dont do any research on cattle,or do you;)

vicwatson · 13-12-2011 12:47AM

Norwayviking wrote: »

Have you been in a slaughterhouse and seen the cattle slaughtered;)
And yes you have to kill to do scientific research:rolleyes:
I was in Norway last year hunting seal for scientific purpose
REASON because the seals carry parasites that effect the food chain,and when they come into the fjords in Norway,they will go for the fish in the fishfarms there.
I am sure you wont eat that here in Ireland either:rolleyes:

What has cattle being slaughtered got to do with the supposed killing of whales for scientific purposes? Cows aren't endangered last I heard.

So you went culling seals as they affect fishfarms in the fjords. hmmm.. how long are seals around, how long are fishfarms around, fishfarms do more damage than good to the environment, and as you talk about visiting a slaughterhouse, it's the same as a Salmon being bred in one of those cage things in the ocean, in crammed conditions. You can see the farmed salmon with thick whites lines in the pink of it - it's fat - as it hasn't had enough room to swim around hence it builds up fat. Ugh !

Anyhow that's way off topic, no nation should accept charity to support the killing of whales in my opinion.

vicwatson · 13-12-2011 12:49AM

Norwayviking wrote: »

It would be a pity if it didnt,i am sure that same goes with cattle,but you dont do any research on cattle,or do you;)

There is no comparison, and if you insist on trying to compare both I won't be conversing with you here again

there just won't be any point.

somefeen · 13-12-2011 12:49AM

Japanese whaling is only illegal on a technicality.

The International Whaling Commission has something called the revised management plan which is being held up by politics. This is going to specify quotas etc for different areas.

Right now Japan aims to kill around 935 Minke whales and 50 Fin and Humpback whales a year. This is actually within the limits of what the revised management plan would bring into force.

My only issue with whaling is there's not really a good humane way to kill one but that's another issue.

deisedave · 13-12-2011 12:54AM

ShooterSF wrote: »

My understanding is that they are using the money to beef up security for the hunting they are doing legally that is attacked (illegally) by greenpeace. Stopping them hunting protected waters is something that should be enforced but likewise greenpeace's and the likes attacks on legal whaling should be stopped too.

Why should Green peace be stopped from stopping people who are killing animals that are very intelligent and are going extinct. The Japanese are disgusting the way they are hunting the whales and Green peace are right pity more people dont stand up for the whales.

Norwayviking · 13-12-2011 12:56AM

vicwatson wrote: »

What has cattle being slaughtered got to do with the supposed killing of whales for scientific purposes? Cows aren't endangered last I heard.

So you went culling seals as they affect fishfarms in the fjords. hmmm.. how long are seals around, how long are fishfarms around, fishfarms do more damage than good to the environment, and as you talk about visiting a slaughterhouse, it's the same as a Salmon being bred in one of those cage things in the ocean, in crammed conditions. You can see the farmed salmon with thick whites lines in the pink of it - it's fat - as it hasn't had enough room to swim around hence it builds up fat. Ugh !

Anyhow that's way off topic, no nation should accept charity to support the killing of whales in my opinion.

Well its not only the fishfarms,its also wild salmon,or any other fish the seals live of.
I am sure noone wants a fish full of parasites on the dinnertable;)
And when did minkewhale become endangered:eek:

Japan admits disaster funds to be used for whaling

Comments