You are currently browsing the monthly archive for June 2010.
The results of the vote to overturn the ban on commercial whaling are in.
The International Whaling Commission’s convention in Morocco, complete with 88 member nations meeting for debate and negotiations over the future of the whaling ban, ended with one conclusion: there isn’t one.
A mother whale and her calf hauled aboard a whaling ship. (Photo from the Brisbane Times.)
A deadlock between pro- and anti-whaling nations has led to frustration and anger on both sides of the debate at the IWC’s inefficacy, with the ultimate resolution being a postponement of the vote for another year.
The ban on commercial whaling remains in place, but has possibly become even weaker due to pro-whaling countries threatening to withdraw from the Commission altogether, thus releasing them from being bound by any regulations.
Anti-whaling countries, such as Australia, are preparing to take the issue over the authority of the IWC and take Japan to an international court over whaling practices in protected Antarctic whale breeding waters.
The ultimate question that must be asked is: are the whales safe, now that the whaling ban remains intact?
The answer is, unfortunately, far from simple.
While the result of the convention has preserved the whaling ban and successfully prevented the moratorium from being lifted, frustration with the IWC is at an all-time high, and it is likely that many nations will resort to escalation in their whaling practices.
The vote is now postponed for one year, and it is now more essential that the push is made for a strengthening of the ban, rather than maintaining the status quo.
It is clear that the whaling ban needs a major overhaul; the ability to enforce regulations is extremely weak and is riddled with loopholes, which has allowed Japan to increase illegal hunting by disguising the practice as research.
A Japanese whaling ship claims they are collecting tissue samples from a hunted whale. Whale meat for sale in supermarkets has been tracked to these "research" whaling ships. (Photo Credit: greenpeace.org)
The only solution is an all-or-nothing approach: the ban must either be strengthened and enforced so that all must abide by its decisions, or it must be eliminated. The latter option is a losing scenario for whale populations, as once the ban is lifted, it has historically been proven that whaling countries will exceed quotas and under report catches.
This is supported by the fact that whaling nations have, in anticipation of the reversal of the ban, have begun developing more consumer products derived from whales, such as golf balls, “eco-friendly” laundry detergent, hair dye, and more. Japan has also begun preparations to purchase its largest whaling ship in history.
It should be clear now, then, that the only way to truly save the whales is to strengthen the ban to the fullest extent possible.
The current resolution to maintain the current flawed ban only serves to encourage whaling nations to take advantage of loopholes even further. While this remains a preferable alternative to reversing the ban entirely, it does little to prevent whale populations that are already on the brink of extinction from being wiped out.
A hunted fin whale. (Photo Credit: In Defense Of Animals)
The battle is far from over, and whales are still at risk of extinction from illegal hunting.
The fact that the whaling ban has not been overturned is a small victory, but it must be emphasized that the ongoing debate is becoming more heated than ever before, and the push to end whaling must strengthen in response.
Again, I encourage you to join the anti-whaling efforts of many nations and organizations by visiting the following links. The future of whales is still undecided, but our ability to make a difference must not be underestimated.
Please look into the efforts of the following groups and see how you can continue to make a difference:
Imagine a fishing line that stretches for miles, with thousands of baited hooks drifting along with it. This process, known as longline fishing, is responsible for the indiscriminate killing of many species of fish and shark, sea turtles, seabirds, and even marine mammals such as dolphin.
A sea turtle killed by a longline. (Photo credit: The Sea Turtle Restoration Project)
Imagine now hundreds of sharks being hooked by this line, and being reeled in one by one. As each shark is hauled aboard the boat, a fisherman takes a large knife and slices off the dorsal and pectoral fins of the still living shark, only to throw it back into the water to die a long and painful death by blood loss, suffocation due to not being able to swim and pass oxygen through the gills, or being eaten in its weak state. The boat fills with fins, and a shark population is systematically eliminated.
Iconic image of a Scalloped Hammerheard Shark, recently finned and thrown back.
This gruesome practice is indiscriminate. Any shark species, regardless of size, sex, age, or endangered classification is subject to the brutal slaughter. The fins of larger endangered species, such as the whale shark or basking shark, are especially prized. A single whale shark fin can be sold for an extremely high price to chinese restaurants in particular, who will display it in their shop window to advertise that they sell shark fin soup.
The fin of a whale shark, the world's largest fish and highly endangered, in a shop window to advertise shark fin soup. (Photo credit: whalesharkproject.org)
Shark fin soup is considered a delicacy in Chinese culture. What was once considered a dish consumed only by the elite, is now produced and consumed by a large middle class as a status symbol. Estimates currently show that between 26 to 73 million sharks are killed annually exclusively for their fins.
Spain is the number one exporter of shark fins, while the United States is in the top 10 offenders.
Countries that export shark fins to Hong Kong. (Credit: Oceana.org)
The export of shark fins to Asian countries is not the only concern. In the United States, shark fin soup is common in chinese restaurants. In Florida, a restaurant called Landshark’s Pizza, which prides itself on being the “home of the shark pizza,” serves the vulnerable-to-extinction Mako shark on one of its “specialty” pizzas (information on contacting this establishment to demand the removal of shark pizza at the end of this entry).
Several dead sharks that have been thrown back into the ocean once their fins were removed. (Credit: stopsharkfinning.net)
Many people have asked me why shark finning is such a big problem. “They’re only sharks,” some have said. Regardless of how you feel about sharks, if you are terrified of them, believe they are a nuisance to swimmers (see my earlier entry on misconceptions about sharks), or are simply indifferent to them, their existence has a direct impact on the health of our planet and the health of the human race.
As the top predators of the ocean, sharks maintain a healthy balance in the ecosystem. As their populations dwindle at a staggering and alarming rate, overpopulation of smaller organisms occur, leading to the decimation of micro-organisms that are the foundation of a healthy ocean. The world’s oceans are our planet’s largest carbon sink. As it loses its ability to absorb carbon as the micro-organisms disappear, the rate at which carbon builds in the atmosphere rises dramatically.
Sharks have very long lives and take decades to reach sexual maturity. Their reproduction rate is very slow, meaning the practice of shark finning is decimating shark populations much faster than the sharks are able to reproduce. Many shark species may face extinction.
While many countries have banned shark finning in their waters, the practice is currently entirely unregulated and unmonitored.
Hundreds of shark fins out to dry. (Credit: sustainablewaters.com)
Suddenly, shark fin soup seems to have a higher cost than most people have realized.
This assault on our oceans and its inhabitants affects all of us, and I strongly encourage you to take action to end this brutal and destructive practice.
Remember the Florida pizzeria mentioned earlier in the post? Contact them and express your concern over their exploitation of our shark populations.
The following links are to organizations that have made some amazing progress, and I urge you to join them in their cause.
- The Shark Alliance – This coalition of organizations regularly updates on conservation efforts and the latest news regarding sharks. It has many articles and studies available for reading published on the website.
- The Blue Ocean Guide to Ocean-Friendly Seafood – Blue Ocean is a wonderful organization that focuses on marine conservation. They have a thorough guide on where seafood comes from, how sustainable it is, and its impact.
- OCEANA – Put an End to Brutal Shark Finning – Oceana is a global organization for marine conservation. The link leads to a petition for Americans to contact their senators about regulating shark finning. For everyone else, visit Oceana.org.
This harmless and beautiful whale shark belongs in the ocean, not in soup.
Disclaimer: Some images in this post are graphic.
On June 22, 2010, the International Whaling Commission and its delegates from 88 member nations will convene in Morocco for a final vote on ending the moratorium on whaling. The whaling ban, which has been in effect since 1986, is on the verge of being completely reversed. The implications of such a proposal, should it be realized, are significant.
The Japanese vessel Yushin Maru during a kill. Photo credit: AFP and Greenpeace
The whaling ban itself has had its fair share of criticisms: the act has made concessions for whaling that is conducted for “scientific research,” a loophole that has been abused with little to no repercussions.
In a twisted sort of logic, it is this abuse of the ban that has inspired the proposal to end the moratorium on commercial whaling. The International Whaling Commission, unable or unwilling to tackle the problem of the loopholes that have allowed whaling to go largely unchecked by such offenders as Japan, Iceland, and Norway, instead is proposing to reverse the ban as a “compromise.”
If you fail to see where the “compromise” is, you are not alone.
Those who support lifting the ban claim that doing so will be beneficial to whale populations. The basis for this claim lies in the idea that by legalizing commercial whaling, offending nations will no longer seek to take advantage of loopholes and will be more willing to follow international regulations.
The concept is not fooling many people; it amounts to rewarding the illegal actions of offending nations, and of course encouraging commercial whaling will have zero benefit to whale populations who are already on the brink of extinction.
A whale carcass being processed. Photo credit: Greenpeace
Prior to the whaling ban, there was nothing preventing countries from under-reporting their catches to fall within accepted quota limitations, as the Soviet Union was guilty of in the 1970s. There is little reassurance that this time around will be any different.
Shockingly, the United States is in support of the reversal of the ban, a complete turnaround from President Obama’s campaign promises to maintain the moratorium on whaling. Not only does the United States support the reversal, it plans on subsidizing the industry.
What this means is that should the ban be lifted, United States taxpayers will be footing the bill. If estimates are correct, such a plan will cost U.S. taxpayers in the tens of millions of dollars.
Aside from select native Alaskan communities, the United States has no national interest in whaling, and does not profit from the industry. Culturally, whaling is not something the Americans tend to approve of, nor should they. Whale meat contains extremely high concentrations of mercury, as it bioaccumulates throughout the food chain. For humans, such levels are toxic if consumed with regularity.
Canned whale meat. Photo by Alex Brooke, biotechlearn.org.nz
And yet, the United States is poised to subsidize commercial whaling; to what end, and to whose benefit?
Certainly not the benefit of the nearly wiped out whale populations, or the people whose health is at risk from mercury poisoning, or the monetary interest of American citizens who are already reeling in a recessed economy, and from the ongoing damage of the Gulf Oil Spill that shows no sign of ending.
In less than two weeks, the whaling industry could be digging into the pockets of American taxpayers, and destroying a true natural wonder that now, more than ever, needs protecting.
The only solution to this global crisis is by demanding that regulatory bodies are able to enforce the existing ban. Public awareness must be such that reversing the ban would stir global communities to action and demand that those who represent them keep their promises.
I urge you to become involved. The following links are to organizations that are involved in stopping this proposal. Make your voice against whaling heard, and your anger and frustration felt. It is time that our politicians and delegates act on our behalf.
- Avaaz.org – The World in Action is running a campaign to buy ad space and create handouts for the meeting in Morocco. Donations are accepted here.
- SaveTheWhalesNow.org has a petition you can sign, as well as other media and information for you to browse.
Every year World Oceans Day falls on June 8th, and this year it falls on a time where the condition of our oceans has never been more precarious. Our oceans, which make up approximately 71% of our planet’s surface, are dying.
One needn’t look far to see the evidence: the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill continues on its relentless spread through the Gulf of Mexico and to the Atlantic. Every day, new photographs are being released of oil-covered wildlife, as well as globs of the black substance washing up on beaches and marshlands. BP continues its attempts at damage control by purchasing Google search terms, effectively controlling the flow of information. The United States government is now reopening offshore drilling in shallow waters, promising “strict regulation” to prevent further environmental damage. This promise may sound familiar, as it is the same platitude given to opponents of offshore drilling from the beginning, and here we are now with our hands stained black from the greatest marine disaster we have ever seen.
A pelican covered in oil from the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill.
Later this week, the United States Senate is also scheduled to vote on a bill to undermine the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate pollution by stripping the Clean Air Act, a bill which is unsurprisingly sponsored by Alaskan Senator Murkowski (whose track record includes supporting drilling in ANWR, as well as shutting down proposals to examine the state of Alaskan wildlife) and supported by the big oil companies.
The United States is also on the verge of supporting a reversal of the moratorium on whaling, a proposal put forward by the International Whaling Commission in an attempt to legalize commercial whaling. They claim that legalizing the slaughter will be beneficial to whale populations, and that the current whaling ban lacks enforcement. Despite what they would have us believe, commercial whaling will not preserve whale populations. Illegal whaling is the practice of hunting whales and claiming it is for scientific research (when in reality these slaughtered whales wind up on the market). Giving and raising quotas for whaling does not save the whales, it merely makes an existing practice legal. The same number of whales, if not more, will be hunted down.
A mother minke whale and her calf hauled aboard a whaling ship in the protected waters of the Australian Whales Sanctuary. (Photo from the Brisbane Times.)
The danger is not only to the whales: but to people. Whales, which exist at the top of the food chain, have extremely high concentrations of mercury that has bioaccumulated in their edible tissues, making them toxic to humans.
Shark finning bans in some of the world’s last shark sanctuaries have also been reversed, and places like the Galapagos Islands where sharks used to thrive will see species practically wiped out entirely. The practice of shark finning is the capture of large numbers of sharks, slicing off their fins and throwing their still living bodies back into the sea, where they bleed out, are eaten, or drown due to air not being able to pass effectively through the gills.
A Scalloped Hammerheard Shark, recently finned and thrown back into the water still alive. (Photo from protect-the-sharks.org)
Protections for small cetaceans, such as dolphins and porpoises, are still non-existent.
At the present, World Oceans Day feels more like a day of mourning than a day of celebration.
Still, things are not hopeless. Every year more and more people engage in ecotourism, including SCUBA diving and snorkeling to see the natural world as it was meant to be experienced: healthy and beautiful. More people are seeing the horrors of whaling, shark finning, and irresponsible exploitation, and demanding that something be done before the damage become irreversible.
In celebration of the spirit of this cultural awakening, I would like to share some information on ways you can help to make a difference. The following links are all to organizations and their current action to save our world’s oceans, including petitions and letters to your political representatives to urge them to represent you and everyone else who wishes to see our ocean’s thrive. I encourage you to look at all of them and see what interests you: it may be easier to make a difference in this world than you imagined. It is time to see where we stand, and what we can do for ourselves and future generations.
With the National Wildlife Federation: Ask your senators to finish what they started, and pass a clean energy bill NOW.
At Oceana, an organization dedicated to preserving our oceans, sign the petition to end Offshore Drilling, and urge your senators to vote NO on undermining the EPA and the Clean Air Act.
Watch the documentaries Sharkwater and The Cove to learn about shark finning and the Japanese dolphin slaughter, and the damage it is doing to the oceans.
Join the Global Shark Initiative to learn about campaigns to save the ocean’s apex predators.
Visit The Shark Alliance , a coalition of non-governmental organizations for the conservation of sharks, to read up on the latest news in conservation efforts.
Acquaint yourself with current endangered species lists according to group (fish, mammals, reptiles, etc.).
Happy Oceans Day.
A pair of wild dolphins off the coast of South Carolina. (Photo taken by author.)
The novel and film adaptation Jaws had a major impact on how people view sharks.
For most people, the thought or sight of a large fin slicing through the water is enough to inspire panic. While animals such as elephants, tigers, lions, and bears (which combined kill hundreds of people every year) receive strong public support for their conservation and protection, all it takes is one fatal shark attack (of the five that occur on average every year from all shark species combined) to inspire mass hunts of this much maligned predator. Fishermen and sportsmen take to the sea, beyond the reach of the average beach swimmer and armed with harpoons, to find and slaughter any shark that is unfortunate enough to be within reach.
Why is it that sharks inspire this reaction?
Perhaps the answer is simple: we do not understand them. The simple answer, however, is not enough to really make ourselves question our deep-seated fear of an animal we are likely to never encounter in the wild, and we must examine why we do not understand them.
How many advertisements on television or on billboards that promote wildlife conservation have shown a panda bear, with its warm eyes and cuddly exterior imploring you to protect it? And how many advertisements or billboards have you seen that show the grim visage of a great white shark, fearsome teeth and all, with its unblinking black stare, bearing the same message?
Humans find it easier to relate to mammals such as ourselves. They demonstrate intelligence and instinct not unlike our own; they nourish and care for their young; they express emotion and pleasure and pain. In this way, we are able to empathize.
Contrast this with the typical image of a shark. They are already alien to us in that they live underwater, having mastered a part of the world that we can only barely function in, and clumsily at that, which threatens us. But there is empathy for whales and dolphins, mammals like us. But the shark, the shark has black eyes that never blink, unreadable and cold. Their mouths never smile, only occasionally show a glimpse of the teeth that millions of years of evolution has perfected. They appear cold, calculating, and completely devoid of emotion or feeling. Humans rely on facial expressions and body language to determine the motives and mood of other creatures. Animals such as sharks that we can not read are terrifying, much in the same way that robots that closely resemble humans unnerve us.
To prove a point, here are some photographs. The first is a sandbar shark that has been caught by a fisherman, and the second is a mako shark that also has been caught. Which one inspires the strongest gut reaction, not of fear, but of pity or compassion?
A caught sandbar shark. (Photo from tx-sharkfishing.com)
Caught mako shark. (Photo from spire.com)
Hazarding a guess, the first image probably evokes more sympathy than the second image. The first image is remarkable in that the shark appears to be conveying emotion through certain visual cues that humans instinctively pick up on: namely, the eyes. They are not the typical “sharky eyes” that we tend to imagine when we think of sharks. They appear almost human, with color and shape. The second image is more stereotypical, black and vacant. The mako looks cold and mean, while the sandbar appears more pitiful and sad. Both have suffered the same fate. Neither were able to scream in pain or horror as they were pulled into the air to suffocate, hooks through their bodies and unable to escape. Perhaps if fish were able to scream, or even whimper, fishing would no longer be within the realm of those with a weak constitution.
The sad truth is that it is easy for us to justify harming that which we believe can not feel pain. A fish, aside from wriggling ineffectively when pulled from the water, is unable to convey its suffering. A slow suffocation and brutal death is somehow acceptable as the norm in the sport of fishing, but frowned upon heavily in hunting. We lack empathy for creatures that are so unlike ourselves that we can not fathom the scope of their intelligence or ability to feel.
It is this lack of empathy that inspires not only cruel disregard, but fear as well. Somehow, a lion does not seem as terrible as a shark, because we feel that we know where we stand with our fellow mammals. We can read their body language and know when there is danger. With a shark, it merely needs to swim in the wrong place at the wrong time to bring out the worst of our fears.
The challenge, then, is to conquer this inability to empathize. We must remember that sharks and all fish are living creatures just like ourselves, that feel pain and suffering, that are capable of social organization and community, and above all else, that they are not indiscriminate man-eaters. The five deaths a year, with millions of people traveling to beaches year after year, can attest to that. The ocean is their territory, and largely, they leave us entirely alone.
Maybe they’re smarter than we think, and that irrational fear and hatred will evolve into respect for one of the planet’s most magnificent predators.
With the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, questions about the future of Offshore Drilling are more important than ever. Calling it a leak is a grievous understatement, as oil is not merely dripping into the ocean; it is erupting. As BP continues to claim that the oil spill is being brought under control, and U.S. vice president Joe Biden supposes that BP is “doing the best” they can, evidence of widespread destruction of marine ecosystems continues to come forward.
Whether or not BP is “doing the best they can” is no longer important. This catastrophe is currently beyond anyone’s capacity to fix, and while agencies scramble to find a solution, we must look even further ahead. It should be a given that this disaster should not have occurred in the first place. Documents have come to light and have been presented before Congress that show that BP was aware of safety concerns on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, including the blowout preventer, and yet decided to continue with operations.
It is clear that the greed of BP partnered with the complacency of the US government in an eagerness to drill has created the greatest marine disaster of human history. Any profit from drilling in the Gulf is far outweighed by the cost of recovering from this disaster. The loss of livelihoods for those living in the region, as well as the loss of crucial marshlands, endangered species, and the destruction of the delicate balance of marine life that maintains a healthy ecosystem and thus a healthy planet, should never be outweighed by the greed of a few CEOs in a large company.
It is essential now, while oil continues to pour into the Gulf of Mexico and begins its creep into the Atlantic, that we do not forget that there are still those who support drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, including former governor Sarah Palin. ANWR remains a remote natural wonder, and to imagine a second massive oil disaster in the wildlife refuge in the Arctic must make us take pause and ask ourselves the question: is it worth it? Plans to push ahead with offshore drilling in ANWR are currently put “on hold.” On hold until when? When the media stops reporting on the Deepwater Horizon spill? “On hold” is simply not enough: there should be no doubt that it must not be an option now or in the future.
If offshore drilling continues, we are at risk for the further destruction of one of the world’s last pristine environments. The lesson learned from the Gulf of Mexico should invigorate the public to demand that we never allow this to happen again. Sarah Palin’s word that she will make sure that regulations are followed to prevent another disaster are worthless. Just before the disaster, BP was a finalist for a governmental award in safety and environmental efficiency. It is time that we stop taking the word of people who profit from the offshore drilling industry and instead see the evidence for ourselves.
Gerald Herbert/The Associated Press
At what point in the eyes of the public does the pursuit of financial gain from finite resources become less important than the preservation of our natural resources and the development of more sustainable energy? Hopefully, the answer to that question is right in front of us.
