Skip to content
All articles
  • All articles
  • About whales & dolphins
  • Create healthy seas
  • End captivity
  • Fundraising
  • Green Whale
  • Kids blogs
  • Prevent deaths in nets
  • Scottish Dolphin Centre
  • Stop whaling
Bottlenose dolphins © Christopher Swann

On the anniversary of the massacre of 1,423 dolphins, what’s changed?

One year ago today, 1,423 Atlantic white-sided dolphins, including mothers with calves and pregnant females,...
Sperm whale (physeter macrocephalus) Gulf of California. The tail of a sperm whale.

To protect whales, we must stop ignoring the high seas

Almost two-thirds of the ocean, or 95% of the habitable space on Earth, are sloshing...
A dolphin plays in front of the WDC Scottish Dolphin Centre at Spey Bay

Sharing our Spey Bay stories – tell us yours

2022 is Scotland's Year of Stories, a year in which stories inspired by, created or...
Orcas in Australia

Did orcas help rescue entangled humpback whale?

Kidzone - quick links Fun Facts Our Goals Curious kids Kids blogs Fantastic fundraisers Gallery...
An orca named 'Hulk' off Caithness, Scotland

My amazing week watching orcas in Scotland

Orca Watch's 10th anniversary event in the far north of Scotland was exhilarating with a...

Faroes dolphin hunt review – disappointing is an understatement

I wasn't alone in hoping that substantial changes would be made as a result of...
Minke whale - V Mignon

We told them this would happen! Time to halt cruel whale experiments

An ill-conceived and so far ill-fated joint US/ Norwegian experiment to test minke whales' reaction...
Sponging dolphin in Shark Bay

Dolphins who catch fish with shells

Kidzone - quick links Fun Facts Our Goals Curious kids Kids blogs Fantastic fundraisers Gallery...

The IWC Scientific Committee meeting: Science and politics

Tuesday saw the start of the International Whaling Commission’s (IWC) 2016 Scientific Committee meeting, hosted in Bled, Slovenia. WDC experts have been part of the meeting for more than 20 years and will present a number of papers as well as take part in the various workshops and sub committees.

One of the most contentious issues on the agenda will be Japan’s renewed scientific whaling programme in Antarctica, (NEWREP-A).

There have been repeated calls not to politicize the work of the Scientific Committee and to ensure that the scientists can focus on the scientific nature of the meeting. After all, the Committee’s role is to give sound scientific advice to the IWC. As the IWC itself puts it, “An important feature of the Convention is the emphasis it places on scientific advice…to this end, the Commission has established a Scientific Committee.”

Unfortunately, things are not as simple or straightforward in the rarefied atmosphere of the IWC. The calls for impartiality towards the political debates which surround the meetings of the IWC plenary (the inter-governmental meeting later in the year), have naturally often been made by Japan itself. Ironically, it is no secret that Japan’s reasons for remaining the world’s No.1 whaling proponent, are purely political. Japan has used the guise of science and the weaknesses of the IWC for decades in order to pursue and advance its non-scientific agenda.

In March 2014, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Japan should immediately rescind its unilateral Antarctic special permit whaling programme “JARPAII” since Japan’s Antarctic whaling did not qualify as scientific.

However, in November 2015, Japan announced that it would resume Antarctic whaling under its new programme, “NEWREP-A”, despite international opposition.

Before this announcement, NEWREP-A had been reviewed by an IWC expert panel, which concluded that the proposal had not demonstrated the need for lethal sampling to achieve its objectives. That is, they did not need to kill any whales to achieve what they claimed they wished to do in the name of science. The Scientific Committee subsequently stated that further work and analyses was necessary and the matter should be tabled for review in 2016. Japan had failed to get the IWC Scientific Committee to endorse its whaling.

In March 2016, Japan returned from Antarctica, having killed 333 minke whales: 103 males and 230 females – more than 90% of the adult females were pregnant.

The population total for the Antarctic minke whale is officially classed as unknown. They are categorized as Data Deficient by the World Conservation Union (IUCN) Red List (2008), making it difficult to know the exact impact of this hunt on the population. The IUCN assessment suggests that there has been a 60% reduction in the population between the 1978–91 period and the 1991–2004 period, but this is still being investigated. If correct the IUCN would classify the Antarctic minke whale as endangered. As the population numbers are unknown any hunting has the potential to significantly impact on the population, especially when females of breeding age and pregnant females are killed.  What we do know is that the Antarctic ecosystem is being adversely affected by climate change and ocean acidification, with major impacts on the krill and prey species that the whales rely on. It may well be that whaling is just one pressure too many for the whales.

The IWC is still seeking to understand and implement the 2014 judgement of the ICJ. It is wrestling with how to create a process that allows it to consider the scientific and policy implications of the judgement. It’s complex, but Japan and her allies are trying to escape the rigorous scientific criticism of its proposals and are desperately trying to avoid the IWC taking on the necessary international enforcement measures to allow it to truly regulate any current whaling. WDC believes that if Japan was to accept the IWC’s implementation of the ICJ judgement in its entirety, then it’s likely it would have to put away its harpoons for ever.

But Japan has sought to disregard the due process that the IWC is creating and whilst WDC completely agrees with the importance of protecting the scientific focus of the SC, the IWC’s scientific credibility can only be ensured by enforcing the necessary due process under the IWC, in line with the ICJ’s ruling, agreed IWC processes and sound scientific advice.

Tolerating anything else is simply an acceptance of the chaos that Japan and her allies want to maintain within the IWC; a chaos from which they hope to rebuild commercial whaling.

About Astrid Fuchs

Astrid Fuchs leitet bei WDC Deutschland den Bereich Policy und strategische Entwicklung. Daneben koordiniert sie die EU-Arbeit und betreut die Bereiche Walfang und Delfinarien.