Photo by kohane http://www.flickr.com/photos/52786697@N00/5159560621/sizes/m/in/photostream/
There has been endless debate about the ethics and morality of whaling over the past decades. People have formed several anti-whaling groups fight for what they believe to be animal cruelty. They have made significant advancements reducing the amount of whaling around the world, but will not rest until they have eliminated all killing of whales. One new up-and-coming idea to prevent whaling is the concept of a quota-trading scheme. This involves ceasing all whaling and compensating the whalers for the number of whales they would have caught. This controversial issue has many anti-whaling organizations and conservationists split. The co-authors of the Nature article “Whaling: Quota trading won’t work” seem to believe that this innovative idea will fail to many reasons. They think that the cultural importance of whaling and the lack of ecological evidence behind the harm of the whaling population causing their doubts. Though these authors make valid points, they do not realize how significant this quota system could be in helping the cause of anti-whalers. The economic impact of this revolutionary policy would have a substantial influence of putting an end to whaling around the world.
The main culprits of this malice are Japanese who have a deep heritage of hunting whales dating back to the twelfth century. According to the authors, “for some countries, such as Japan, whaling is a symbol of national and cultural identity” (Verissimo, and Metcalfe). They believe that strong tradition that the Japanese, and other whaling groups with cultural roots in whaling, will refuse to accept the monetary offer in exchange for stopping their national past time. Some Japanese officials believe so strongly in the cultural importance that they refer to anti-whalers as racists. Joji Morishita of Japanese Fisheries Agency says that “singling out [Japan's] whaling is cultural imperialism – some people would say it's racism.” Though the authors of this article believe strongly in this “cultural importance,” others see through the cover and have exposed just how important this whaling is. One professor has researched and written how modern commercial whaling has very little resemblance to the subsistence whaling that is the basis for whaling culture. Several proponents of the quota system believe this argument and make it the focus as to why to create the program. They believe that the main reason the whalers insist on continuing this cruelty is for the financial gains. Therefore, with this logic, many of the hunters should go along with this policy because they would get paid for doing nothing. It would lead to a win-win situation for everyone, the whalers get paid and the anti-whaling groups prevent the killing of more whales.
Another reason that the authors from Nature do not think this scheme will work is because of the “specifications” of the hunting process. First, many of the whalers claim they are killing the whales for “scientific research.” As a loophole in previous whaling agreements, they have permission to hunt whales as long as it is solely for scientific advancement. These studies include “estimation of trends in abundance, estimation of stock of minke whales, and study effect of environment changes” (High North Alliance”. However, to some, it would be more effective to find other ways to examine these topics, instead of killing the heart for the research. Another interesting coincidence about these scientific killings is that all the meat from these scores is sold in markets like any other whale meat. Although at a certain time the Japanese diet was reliant on whale meat, they have found other sources of food diminishing the demand for this meat. This would allow the quota system to be more effective because the people would not be missing any crucial part of their existence and the whalers continue to get paid.
An additional specification that the whalers allegedly follow is what types of whales they hunt. According to them, they “only kill the common minke whale” (Verissimo, and Metcalfe). They are allowed to hunt these whales because they are not endangered and have a plentiful population. It is because of this that separates anti-whaler groups and conservationists. Anti-whaler organizations believe in stopping all harm, cruelty, and killing of any whales while conservationists are more concentrated on maintaining the correct populations of animals in all ecosystems. Because whale hunters are only killing whales with large populations, conservationists are not as involved as other groups would want them to be. However, there have been many observed violations of their specified condition. If more evidence of this can be found, then more conservationists will join in the effort to put the quota system into effect.
The main concern for some people on why this would not work is how it would be funded. There is a simple solution to this question. Large sums of money already exit in the anti-whaling industry. “Anti-whaling organizations spend millions of dollars every year trying to stop the Japanese whaling fleet from hunting the common minke whale” (Verissimo, and Metcalfe). This money normally goes to stopping the hunting directly with ships and crews of their own. However, this money can be converted to funding the quota system. The organizations would no longer need the money for ships and workers since the whalers would no longer be hunting. This straightforward reallocation of resources could easily be the starting point of this change. One could argue that the whalers will simply take the money and then still continue hunting. In order to prevent this, regulators can be spread around, and any indication of foul play will result in a cut in the payments.
Whales are some of the most majestic creatures that can be found in the deep blue seas. However, overall there is very little being done to preserve their existence in this world. Here at Chapel Hill, we do not currently have any clubs, groups, or organizations established that are fighting for this cause. However, with the wide variety of people one could easily be formed by one determined individual. They could have a significant effect on this issue, especially if the quota-system is put into place. They could raise money to buy into the quota and save even more lives of whales. This just shows another example of why UNC is so great.
Barcott, Bruce. "Save the Whales--By Hunting Them?." OnEarth. N.p., 11 Jan 2012. Web. 26 Feb 2012. <http://www.onearth.org/article/save-the-whales-by-hunting-them>.
Carpenter, Randal. "Anti-whaling groups unite against plan to undermine international ban on commercial whaling." Wildlife Extra. N.p., 26 Jan 2010. Web. 2 Feb 2012. <http://www.wildlifeextra.com/go/news/iwc-meeting009.html
"Japan's Whale Research Programs." High North Alliance. N.p., 2000. Web. 27 Feb 2012. <http://www.highnorth.no/library/hunts/Other/ja-qu-an.htm>.
Verissimo, Diogo, and Kristian Metcalfe. "Whaling:Quota trading won't work." Nature. 09 02 2012: n. page. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. <http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v482/n7384/full/482162a.html>.
"whaling." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 26 Feb. 2012. <http://www.britannica.co
No comments:
Post a Comment