Sujet glissant : la chasse à la baleine
Modérateurs : Myriaðe, Souricette
Sujet glissant : la chasse à la baleine
J'ai entendu aujourd'hui que le Ministre de la Pêche islandais avait annoncé la reprise de la chasse à la baleine. Qu'en est-il et comment les Islandais réagissent à ce type d'annonce ?
C'est une demie-surprise seulement, ils ont toujours dit qu'ils finiraient par rouvrir la chasse commerciale à la baleine, n'en déplaise à la CIB.
Alors nous avions Elise Lucet qui faisait la journaliste outrée et surprise ce midi au 13h de France 2, ne comprenant pas cette décision, etc... etc...
Et patati patata...
Si tous les Etats au monde étaient autant soucieux de l'environnement que l'est l'Islande... la planète ne serait pas cet état de délabrement écologique...
"Ouuuuuuuuuh au secours... les Islandais vont tuer toutes les baleines... Oouhhh harou! harou!!" Je les entends les démago... je les entends déjà!
Les Islandais sont sûrement parmi les mieux informés sur la question, alors je ne vois pas à quoi ça sert de leur jeter bêtement la pierre en criant au scandale écologique...
Alors nous avions Elise Lucet qui faisait la journaliste outrée et surprise ce midi au 13h de France 2, ne comprenant pas cette décision, etc... etc...
Et patati patata...
Si tous les Etats au monde étaient autant soucieux de l'environnement que l'est l'Islande... la planète ne serait pas cet état de délabrement écologique...
"Ouuuuuuuuuh au secours... les Islandais vont tuer toutes les baleines... Oouhhh harou! harou!!" Je les entends les démago... je les entends déjà!
Les Islandais sont sûrement parmi les mieux informés sur la question, alors je ne vois pas à quoi ça sert de leur jeter bêtement la pierre en criant au scandale écologique...
certes mais réagirait comme ceci si les Islandais étaient 50 millions ?
J'ai l'impression que nous sommes plus tolérants avec l'Islande qu'avec le Japon par exemple.
Et là on ne parle pas d'environnement mais d'espèces humaines. Et je pense que si des spécialistes disent que la baleine est une espèce en voie d'extinction, ils doivent savoir ce qu'ils disent.
Surtout qu'on ne vas pas me dire que les Islandais ne pourraient pas se passer de ce mets délicat. Les sociétés évoluent.
Mais j'avoue que je suis assez partagé sur le sujet, je me dis que ce sont pas 30 baleines qui vont changer la face du monde, mais je ne pense ca que parce que l'Islande est peu peuplée.
J'ai l'impression que nous sommes plus tolérants avec l'Islande qu'avec le Japon par exemple.
Et là on ne parle pas d'environnement mais d'espèces humaines. Et je pense que si des spécialistes disent que la baleine est une espèce en voie d'extinction, ils doivent savoir ce qu'ils disent.
Surtout qu'on ne vas pas me dire que les Islandais ne pourraient pas se passer de ce mets délicat. Les sociétés évoluent.
Mais j'avoue que je suis assez partagé sur le sujet, je me dis que ce sont pas 30 baleines qui vont changer la face du monde, mais je ne pense ca que parce que l'Islande est peu peuplée.
alain a écrit :
Et là on ne parle pas d'environnement mais d'espèces humaines. Et je pense que si des spécialistes disent que la baleine est une espèce en voie d'extinction, ils doivent savoir ce qu'ils disent.
les baleines? des espèces humaines?! des mammifères tu veux dire! la nuance est là et elle est de taille!
je fais largement plus confiance aux scientifiques islandais qui savent où en est exactement la situation de la faune vivant dans leur écosystème marin environnant qu'aux démagogues radicaux de greenpeace et autres organisations écologiques du même type souvent à la solde d'intérêts particuliers dans des pays particuliers.
La baleine
Ahhh ! Ispsilon, tout à fait d'accord ! Tu as bien raison : peu d'Etats dans le monde sont en mesure de donner des leçons à l'Islande dans le domaine de la protection de l'environnement !
Les baleines de Minke (petits rorquals) ont considérablement proliféré dans les eaux islandaises, n'étant plus (ou pratiquement plus) chassées depuis 20 ans. Pour les seules baleines de Minke, on estime la population vivant actuellement autour de l'île à environ 45 000 animaux adultes. Cette espèce n'est pas menacée de disparition. Et pour la campagne 2006-2007, il n'est question de chasser que trente baleines de Minke (petits rorquals) et neuf rorquals communs.
L'Islande n'envisage pas de chasser la baleine à bosse, qui est effectivement une espèce protégée.
En fait, il faut faire la part du mythe et de la réalité. La baleine est un symbole, c'est le plus gros animal de la planète, elle est devenue le symbole d'une nature préservée, elle nous fascine quand on la voit (moi le premier) ... Mais une fois que les données objectives sur les risques de sa disparition sont connues et analysées, je pense qu'on peut avoir une approche rationnelle de la question.
Par contre, un certain nombre d'Etats "donneurs de leçons" feraient bien de s'interroger sur le rôle qu'ils ont joué (et jouent) en déversant impunément depuis des décennies leurs saloperies et autres métaux lourds dans les océans, ce qui fait que les baleines de l'arctique aujourd'hui (étant au sommet de la chaîne alimentaire) sont truffées de ces substances toxiques !
Aux îles Feroe, la consommation de viande de mammifères marins est interdite aux femmes enceintes pour cette raison.
Chris.
Les baleines de Minke (petits rorquals) ont considérablement proliféré dans les eaux islandaises, n'étant plus (ou pratiquement plus) chassées depuis 20 ans. Pour les seules baleines de Minke, on estime la population vivant actuellement autour de l'île à environ 45 000 animaux adultes. Cette espèce n'est pas menacée de disparition. Et pour la campagne 2006-2007, il n'est question de chasser que trente baleines de Minke (petits rorquals) et neuf rorquals communs.
L'Islande n'envisage pas de chasser la baleine à bosse, qui est effectivement une espèce protégée.
En fait, il faut faire la part du mythe et de la réalité. La baleine est un symbole, c'est le plus gros animal de la planète, elle est devenue le symbole d'une nature préservée, elle nous fascine quand on la voit (moi le premier) ... Mais une fois que les données objectives sur les risques de sa disparition sont connues et analysées, je pense qu'on peut avoir une approche rationnelle de la question.
Par contre, un certain nombre d'Etats "donneurs de leçons" feraient bien de s'interroger sur le rôle qu'ils ont joué (et jouent) en déversant impunément depuis des décennies leurs saloperies et autres métaux lourds dans les océans, ce qui fait que les baleines de l'arctique aujourd'hui (étant au sommet de la chaîne alimentaire) sont truffées de ces substances toxiques !
Aux îles Feroe, la consommation de viande de mammifères marins est interdite aux femmes enceintes pour cette raison.
Chris.
Modifié en dernier par Chris le 19 oct. 2006, 20:52, modifié 1 fois.
Re: La baleine
Exactement Chris. Je ne voulais pas avancer de chiffres, mais tu as raison avec les rorquals. Ainsi, le moratoire instauré par la CIB en 1986 a eu du bon, et c'est tant mieux. Mais les Islandais, idem pour la Norvège et le Japon, se basent sur le fait que ce moratoire a fini par engendré une certaine surpopulation chez certaines espèces, potentiellement dangereuse pour l'équilibre de l'écosystème. Dont acte...Chris a écrit :Les baleines de Minke (petits rorquals) ont considérablement proliféré dans les eaux islandaises, n'étant plus (ou pratiquement plus) chassées depuis 20 ans. Pour les seules baleines de Minke, on estime la population vivant actuellement autour de l'île à environ 55 000 animaux adultes. Cette espèce n'est pas menacée de disparition. Et pour la campagne 2006-2007, il n'est question de chasser que trente baleines de Minke (petits rorquals) et neuf rorquals communs.
Par contre, un certain nombre d'Etats "donneurs de leçons" feraient bien de s'interroger sur le rôle qu'ils ont joué (et jouent) en déversant impunément depuis des décennies leurs saloperies et autres métaux lourds dans les océans, ce qui fait que les baleines de l'arctique aujourd'hui (étant au sommet de la chaîne alimentaire) sont truffées de ces substances toxiques !
Aux îles Feroe, la consommation de viande de mammifères marins est interdite aux femmes enceintes pour cette raison.
Chris.
Après, qu'ils fassent une sorte de provocation en parlant de chasse commerciale et non plus de chasse scientifique... C'est certain que les quotas pour les saisons vont être un peu augmentés dans ce cadre là, mais voyons... pas besoin de voir plus loin que son nez pour comprendre que ce n'est pas l'enjeu commercial qui est prédominant ici.
Alors encore une fois messieurs et mesdames qui font les outrés "oh mon dieu, ils vont tuer des baleines pour les vendre et les manger, ouhhh mais c'est une honte! se faire ainsi de l'argent de cette façon" et bla bla bla... vous me faites doucettement rigoler...
Et encore une fois Chris, tout à fait raison enfin avec les Iles Féröé :
Les mêmes qui ont fait plusieurs fois les pourfendeurs de leçon sur les côtes féringiennes pour protester régulièrement contre l'ouverture de la chasse à la baleine chaque année, (quand les baleines sont tuées à l'ancienne etc etc... dans ce qui est un trait tout à fait marquant de la culture féringienne) et qui sont pris pour des rigolos de kermesse par les Féringiens eux-mêmes qui connaissent le sujet bien mieux que ces protestaires d'une écologie doctrinaire, feraient mieux de s'occuper comme tu dis de ceux de leurs gouvernements qui polluent à tire larigot les océans et les fleuves...
Mais non, car et c'est encore eux dont je parle ici, verra-t-on jamais un jour Greepeace aller protester avec des zodiaques le long des côtes américaines contre tel site industriel polluant une rivière? Verra-t-on un jour un militant Greenpeace survoler dans un grand charivari médiatique l'espace aérien d'une centrale nucléaire américaine dont l'accès est strictement interdit?
Bien sûr que non, car Greenpeace est financée en grande partie par des fonds américains. Greenpeace est une de ces ONG noyautée de façon tout à fait contradictoire avec ses soit-disant objectifs, et Greenpeace lance bien souvent des actions là où elle le souhaite..., là où il y a des intérêts commerciaux ou stratégiques bien compris...
Enfin bref... passons
-
Jacques MER
Sujet glissant : la baleine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comme vous le savez (cf. Courrier d'Islande de ce mois) l'Islande avait, en juin-juillet, décidé la mise en oeuvre de la troisième tranche de plan de "chasse scientifique à la baleine", prévoyant la capture léthale d'un nombre limité de "minke whales".
Le 17 octobre le gouvernement est allé plus loin, et a décidé la reprise de la chasse "commerciale" à la baleine, sur une base limitée.
Cette décision a été suivie d'une communication (avec une réunion ad-hoc) officielle aux Ambassadeurs étrangers en poste à Reykjavik, expliquant les motifs de la mesure et anticipant les protestations de certains pays, États-Unis et Royaume-Uni.
Pour le grand public, le Ministère des pêcheries a publié un communiqué et un argumentaire (en anglais) que je vous envoie en pièce jointe.
Comme vous le savez, sur cette question, des divergences opposent les gouvernements islandais et français (voir Site de notre Ministère des affaires étrangères.
Amitiés.
Declaration by the Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries
10/17/06
Declaration by the Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries
Iceland decides to resume sustainable whaling
The Icelandic economy is overwhelmingly dependent on the utilisation of living marine resources in the ocean around the country. The sustainability of the utilisation is therefore of central importance for the long-term well being of the Icelandic people. For this reason, Iceland places great emphasis on effective management of fisheries and on scientific research on all the components of the marine ecosystem. At a time when many fish stocks around the world are declining, or even depleted, Iceland's marine resources are generally in a healthy state, because of this emphasis. The annual catch quotas for fishing and whaling are based on recommendations by scientists, who regularly monitor the status of stocks, thus ensuring that the activity is sustainable.
Iceland has for a number of years acknowledged the need for scientific research on whales to gain a better understanding of the interaction between the different whale stocks and other marine species and the role of whales in the marine ecosystem. Therefore, Iceland began implementing a research plan on minke whales in 2003. So far 161 minke whales have been taken and the research plan will be completed in 2007 when the sample size of 200 minke whales has been obtained. Whaling quotas take into account the number of whales that will be taken in the implementation of the research plan, ensuring that total catches will be well within a sustainable level.
Whaling has been strictly managed in Iceland for a long time. Long before any international agreements on whale conservation, the Icelandic Parliament (Althingi) banned all whaling in 1915 after a period of overexploitation from foreign land stations in Iceland during the period 1883-1915. This Icelandic "moratorium" lasted until 1948, apart from some limited catches during the period 1935-1939. Strict rules and limitations were applied to whaling in Iceland which was restricted to small-scale land based operation from 1948 to 1985 when all commercial whaling was again halted following a decision by the International Whaling Commission (IWC).
There are many different whale species and stocks in the world's oceans. Some are in a poor state and in need of protection. However, many whale populations are far from being threatened or endangered. The taking of threatened or endangered whales is certainly not justified and is strongly opposed by Iceland. On the other hand, sustainable takes of animals from abundant populations are consistent with the principle of sustainable development.
The total stock size of Central North-Atlantic minke whales is close to 70,000 animals, of which around 43,600 are in Icelandic coastal waters. Fin whales in the Central North-Atlantic number around 25,800 animals. Both these estimates have been agreed upon by consensus by the Scientific Committees of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). The decision to resume sustainable whaling involves takes of 30 minke whales and nine fin whales, during the fishing year 2006/2007 which ends on August 31 2007. This will bring the total catches of minke whales in Icelandic waters during this fishing year to 69, including the minke whales taken in completing the research plan. These takes equal less than 0.2% of the number of minke whales in Icelandic coastal waters, an even smaller fraction of the total stock, and less than 0.04% of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic. Both are considered to be close to pre-exploitation levels and estimated sustainable annual catch levels are 200 and 400 fin and minke whales, respectively. As the catch limits now issued are much lower, the catches will not have a significant impact on these abundant whale stocks. A responsible management system will ensure that the catch quotas set will not be exceeded. The catches are clearly sustainable and therefore consistent with the principle of sustainable development.
The resumption of sustainable whaling is legal under international law. At the time of the re-entry of Iceland into the IWC, Iceland made a reservation with respect to the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling. As a part of that reservation, Iceland committed itself not to authorise commercial whaling before 2006 and thereafter not to authorise such whaling while progress was being made in negotiating the IWC?s Revised Management Scheme (RMS), a management framework for commercial whaling.
At the IWC?s Annual Meeting in 2005 Iceland went on record expressing its regret that no progress was being made in the RMS discussions. At this years IWC Annual Meeting, Iceland?s judgement of the situation was reconfirmed as the IWC generally agreed that talks on an RMS had reached an impasse. As a result, Iceland?s reservation has taken effect. Therefore, Iceland is no longer bound by the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling. This puts Iceland in the same position as other IWC members that are not bound by the moratorium, such as Norway.
Several countries catch whales. The United States has for instance a five year block quota of 280 bowhead whales from a stock of less than 10,000. Of those who, like Iceland, operate within the IWC the biggest whaling countries by numbers and volume are the United States, Russia, Norway, Japan and Greenland. Like Iceland's, all those whaling operations are sustainable and legal and in accordance with the rules of the IWC.
Attached is an information paper containing some questions and answers regarding the resumption of sustainable whaling in Iceland.
Skip to navigation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions and Answers about sustainable whaling
Resumption of Sustainable Whaling
Questions and Answers
1
Q: What is the importance of sustainable utilisation of living marine resources to Iceland?
A: The Icelandic economy is overwhelmingly dependent on the utilization of living marine resources and fisheries in general constitute around 60% of Iceland?s revenue from exported goods and almost 40% of Icelandic exported goods and services. Substantial whale research, including a series of large scale sightings surveys in the North Atlantic (NASS), has been conducted in Icelandic waters. This series, which covers the period from 1986, demonstrates that fin and minke whales are abundant and can be harvested in a sustainable way.
2
Q: Isn?t sustainable whaling illegal because of the IWC so-called moratorium on commercial whaling?
A: No. For those countries that are bound by the so-called moratorium, commercial whaling is not permitted. There has never been a time when all IWC members have been bound by it.
At the time of the re-entry of Iceland into the International Whaling Commission (IWC), Iceland made a reservation with respect to the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling. As a part of the reservation, Iceland committed itself not to authorise commercial whaling before 2006. Thereafter such whaling would not be authorised while progress was being made in negotiations regarding the IWC?s Revised Management Scheme (RMS), a management framework for sustainable whaling.
At the IWC?s Annual Meeting in 2005 Iceland warned that no progress was being made in the RMS discussions. No objection was raised at the Annual Meeting to Iceland?s statement. At this year?s IWC Annual Meeting, Iceland?s understanding was reconfirmed as the IWC generally agreed that talks on an RMS had reached an impasse. Therefore, the two limitations attached to Iceland?s reservation with respect to the so-called moratorium no longer apply.
Accordingly, Iceland?s reservation is now in effect and Iceland has the legal right to resume sustainable whaling. This puts Iceland in the same position as other IWC members that are not bound by the so-called moratorium, such as Norway.
3
Q: Will Iceland?s decision to resume sustainable whaling not have a negative effect on the negotiations on a Revised Management Scheme (RMS) within the IWC?
A: No. At the time Iceland re-joined the IWC it believed progress was being made in the RMS discussions. Iceland worked hard after re-joining the IWC to bring the IWC closer to finalising an RMS. Unfortunately, this work has proved fruitless as consensus was reached at this years IWC Annual Meeting that the talks on the RMS were at an impasse.
4
Q: Does Iceland have a long whaling history?
A: Utilisation of whale resources has been a traditional part of Iceland?s history, providing an important dietary component throughout the ages. Long before any international agreements on whale conservation the Icelandic Parliament (Althing) banned all whaling in 1915, after a period of overexploitation from foreign land-stations in Iceland during the period 1883-1915. This Icelandic "moratorium" lasted, apart from some limited catches during 1935-1939, until 1948 when a licence was given to a single land-station. When commercial whaling was halted from 1985 it had a negative economic and social impact on communities dependent on whaling. In the years 1985-1989 Iceland conducted a scientific research program, including takes of a limited number of fin and sei whales. No whaling was conducted in the period of 1990-2002. In 2003 Iceland started its implementation of the minke whale research program, including the take of 200 minke whales in the period of 2003-2007. Today 161 minke whales have been taken, thereof 60 in 2006. The implementation of the research plan will be completed in 2007 when the originally determined sample size of 200 minke whales has been achieved.
5
Q: How many whales has Iceland now decided to take?
A: Iceland?s decision to resume sustainable whaling involves the take of 30 minke whales and nine fin whales, during the current Icelandic fishing year which ends on 31 August 2007. Taking into account the 39 minke whales that will be taken in 2007 to complete the implementation of the minke whale research plan, the catches of minke whales will be 69 animals. These takes equal less than 0.2% of the number of minke whales in Icelandic coastal waters, an even smaller fraction of the total stock, and less than 0.04% of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic. Both are considered to be close to pre-exploitation levels and estimated sustainable annual catch levels are 200 and 400 fin and minke whales respectively. As the catch limits now issued are much lower, the catches will not have a significant impact on whale stocks. A responsible management system will ensure that the catch quotas set will not be exceeded. The catches are clearly sustainable and therefore consistent with the principle of sustainable development.
6
Q: Why did Iceland decide to resume sustainable whaling?
A: The position of Iceland has always been that whale stocks should be utilised in a sustainable manner like any other living marine resource.
Icelandic policy on ocean issues is based on maintaining the future health, biodiversity and sustainability of the ocean surrounding Iceland, in order that it may continue to be a resource that supports and promotes the nation?s wellbeing. This involves conservation and management of the resources based on scientific knowledge and guided by respect for the marine ecosystem as a whole.
Abundance estimates for both minke and fin whales around Iceland have been approved both by the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the Scientific Committee of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). Both have been deemed abundant.
7
Q: What will be the effect of the proposed whaling on the whale populations in question?
A: Iceland has in collaboration with neighbouring countries in the North Atlantic conducted large scale sightings surveys at regular intervals since 1987. According to the latest survey, the number of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic is estimated at 25,800 animals and the total stock size of Central North-Atlantic minke whales is close to 70,000 animals, of which around 43,600 are in Icelandic coastal waters. Both these estimates have been agreed upon by consensus by the Scientific Committees of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). Both populations are believed to be close to pre-exploitation levels and estimated sustainable annual catch levels are 200 and 400 fin and minke whales respectively. The catch limits now issued are much lower. Therefore, the catches will not have significant impact on these highly abundant whale populations. A responsible management system will ensure that the catches are sustainable and that catch quotas will not be exceeded.
Regular sightings surveys will be continued to monitor the development of the whale stocks. The next such survey will be conducted in 2007. Catch quotas will be adjusted accordingly to ensure long-term sustainability.
8
Q: Are fin whales not listed as endangered in the IUCN red list of threatened species?
A: The IUCN red list of threatened species is based on a global perspective regarding the status of species. Fin whales have separate populations (stocks) in all the major ocean areas. There is no interchange of whales between major ocean areas.
Such a global perspective, merging independent stocks together, is inconsistent with general practice of scientifically based management of fisheries. The use of IUCN criteria on fin whales in the Central North Atlantic would not lead to their classification as endangered or threatened.
The abundance estimate for fin whales in the Central North Atlantic has been agreed by consensus by the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the Scientific Committee of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). There is agreement within both of these scientific committees that the fin whale is neither endangered nor threatened.
9
Q: Are 69 animals a high proportion of the minke whale stock in Icelandic coastal waters and are nine animals a high proportion of the number of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic?
A: No. The total stock size of Central North-Atlantic minke whales is close to 70,000 animals, of which around 43,600 are in Icelandic costal waters. The number of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic is estimated at around 25,800 animals. These abundance estimates have been agreed by consensus by the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the Scientific Committee of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). The takes of 69 minke whales and nine fin whales equal less than 0.2% of the minke whales in Icelandic coastal waters and an even smaller fraction of the total stock and less than 0.04% of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic. The catches are clearly sustainable and therefore consistent with the principle of sustainable development.
10
Q: Will the implementation of the current research plan on minke whales be suspended?
A: The implementation of the research plan on minke whales will be completed in 2007 when the targeted sample size of 200 minke whales has been achieved. However, scientific activities will continue in other forms in order to closely monitor the health of Iceland?s marine ecosystem. The catch quotas for minke whales take into account the number of whales that will be taken in the implementation of the research plan, ensuring that total catches will be well within a sustainable level.
11
Q: Is the management of whaling not a job for the International Whaling Commission (IWC)?
A: The IWC has not been able to fulfil its role in the management of whaling as it is obliged to do according to the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. No progress has been made in the RMS discussions within the IWC over the past two years and any further effort was suspended indefinitely after the IWC agreed that talks on the RMS had reached an impasse. Despite the fact that the Scientific Committee of the IWC agreed on the scientific aspects of a management scheme fourteen years ago, there are no signs indicating that the IWC will manage whaling in the foreseeable future.
At the IWC Annual Meeting this year, the so-called St. Kitts and Nevis Declaration was approved by a majority of IWC members. In this declaration it is stated among other things that whale stocks should be utilised in a sustainable way on a scientific basis and that the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling is unnecessary. Furthermore it declares that the IWC can be saved from collapse only by implementing conservation and management measures.
With the IWC?s majority now having come to the conclusion that the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling was unnecessary, the resumption of sustainable whaling is clearly in line with the will of the majority of IWC members.
12
Q: Has the Scientific Committee of the IWC expressed opposition to the proposed catches?
A: The Scientific Committee of the IWC has not discussed this particular decision. However, at this year?s annual meeting the Scientific Committee accepted an abundance estimate of 25,800 fin whales in the Central North Atlantic. The Scientific Committee had previously accepted an abundance estimate of 43,600 for minke whales around Iceland. The allowed catches now constitute less than 0.04% and 0.2% of these accepted estimates for fin and minke whales, respectively, well below generally accepted values for sustainable yield of whale stocks.
13
Q: Will Iceland engage in international trade in whale products obtained in commercial whaling?
A: Whale products should be treated in the same way as any other seafood products. Icelandic whale products are likely to be consumed both domestically and overseas.
Any international trade in Icelandic whale products will be conducted in accordance with Iceland?s obligations under international law.
14
Q: Should the whale products not be consumed domestically rather than be subject to international trade?
A: In Iceland?s view, the question of international trade has no bearing on the management of whaling or whale conservation. What matters is how many whales are taken, not where they are consumed after they are taken.
Iceland does not support the view that international trade is fundamentally bad, neither regarding whale products nor other, legally traded products. Nor does Iceland support trade discrimination between large and small countries.
The sustainability of the catches is determined by the level of the catches and has nothing whatsoever to do with what distance the products are transported before they are used.
However, there are two reasons one can have for opposing international trade in sustainably taken whale products. Firstly, one can feel that only large countries should be allowed to conduct whaling while countries that have small domestic markets should not. Using this discriminatory reasoning, one can for example conclude that large countries such as the USA and Japan can conduct whaling but small countries like Iceland and the Faroe Islands can not. Secondly, one can feel that international trade in general is a bad thing and should be minimised. This anti-capitalist reasoning not only applies to international trade in whale products but to all international trade, such as trade in textiles, food products and industrial products.
Iceland strongly opposes both these arguments. Iceland feels it is important to ensure the sustainability of the utilisation of living marine resources, but this goal should not be used to justify inappropriate trade barriers and trade discrimination.
15
Q: Do the whales suffer when they are caught?
A: The methods used for hunting the whales are the best available. No high-speed chase is involved and most of the animals die without realising that they are being hunted. Statistics from Norway, where the same methods are used, show that around 80% of the animals die instantly upon being hit. An overwhelming majority of the remaining 20% die within minutes. The methods used ensure that the catches are done in the quickest and most humane way possible and that suffering is minimised. In fact, these methods are more effective and humane than those used for hunting other large mammals, such as deer.
16
Q: Is Iceland going against world public opinion by conducting sustainable whaling?
A: No. Several countries catch whales, most of them on a much bigger scale than Iceland. The United States has for instance a five year block quota of 280 bowhead whales from a stock of less than 10,000 animals. Of those who, like Iceland, operate within the International Whaling Commission (IWC) the biggest whaling countries by numbers and volume are the United States, Russia, Norway, Japan and Greenland. Like Iceland?s, all those whaling operations are sustainable and legal and in accordance with the rules of the IWC.
The majority of the members of the International Whaling Commission has clearly expressed its support for sustainable whaling, which is consistent with the principle of sustainable development. Like most countries, Iceland strongly opposes unsustainable whaling operations and supports the protection of whale stocks that are threatened.
17
Q: Are Icelanders in favour of whaling?
A: According to a poll by Gallup from September 2006, around 3/4 of Icelanders, aged 16-75 years, are in favour of sustainable whaling. This is almost exactly the same percentage as in a poll from 1997. Over the same period the proportion of Icelanders opposing whaling has fallen from around 20% to around 10%.
18
Q: Are there reasons to be concerned about the health impacts of whale meat?
A: There are no reasons to fear negative health impacts from consuming whale meat. All marine organisms, particularly long-living species high in the food chain, have measurable levels of contaminants. Relatively high values have been found in some toothed cetaceans, as well as in some commercially exploited fish species such as tuna and halibut. However, baleen whales are at a low level in the food chain. Therefore, they contain pollutants at generally much lower values. Analysis of meat and blubber for pollutants in Icelandic fin and minke whales, both of which are baleen whales, have shown levels well below residue limits stipulated for food.
On the contrary studies have shown whale products to represent high quality food regarding nutrients and bioactive components beneficial for human health. The meat is lean and it?s fat is rich in Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids. Additionally, like other seafood, the meat is of high quality protein and rich in essential minerals and some vitamins. The blubber, a fatty tissue, is very rich in Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids.
19
Q: Is there a reason to believe that sustainable whaling will have a negative impact on tourism in Iceland?
A: Statistics show that the number of tourists to Iceland for the past few years has increased. Iceland?s implementation of a program that includes the taking of whales for scientific purposes does not seem to have affected tourism to Iceland in any way.
20
Q: Will resumption of sustainable whaling hurt whale-watching operations in Iceland?
A: There is no reason to believe that the sustainable whaling will affect the whale-watching industry as whale-watching areas are mostly confined to locations near the harbours of departure. The stocks to be harvested are both highly abundant and distributed over a much wider area.
Whaling and whale-watching can coexist with good cooperation between the parties involved. This has been the case in other countries where whale-watching and whaling are practiced side by side.
Prepared by the Ministry of Fisheries and the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, in October 2006.Revenir en haut
Comme vous le savez (cf. Courrier d'Islande de ce mois) l'Islande avait, en juin-juillet, décidé la mise en oeuvre de la troisième tranche de plan de "chasse scientifique à la baleine", prévoyant la capture léthale d'un nombre limité de "minke whales".
Le 17 octobre le gouvernement est allé plus loin, et a décidé la reprise de la chasse "commerciale" à la baleine, sur une base limitée.
Cette décision a été suivie d'une communication (avec une réunion ad-hoc) officielle aux Ambassadeurs étrangers en poste à Reykjavik, expliquant les motifs de la mesure et anticipant les protestations de certains pays, États-Unis et Royaume-Uni.
Pour le grand public, le Ministère des pêcheries a publié un communiqué et un argumentaire (en anglais) que je vous envoie en pièce jointe.
Comme vous le savez, sur cette question, des divergences opposent les gouvernements islandais et français (voir Site de notre Ministère des affaires étrangères.
Amitiés.
Declaration by the Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries
10/17/06
Declaration by the Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries
Iceland decides to resume sustainable whaling
The Icelandic economy is overwhelmingly dependent on the utilisation of living marine resources in the ocean around the country. The sustainability of the utilisation is therefore of central importance for the long-term well being of the Icelandic people. For this reason, Iceland places great emphasis on effective management of fisheries and on scientific research on all the components of the marine ecosystem. At a time when many fish stocks around the world are declining, or even depleted, Iceland's marine resources are generally in a healthy state, because of this emphasis. The annual catch quotas for fishing and whaling are based on recommendations by scientists, who regularly monitor the status of stocks, thus ensuring that the activity is sustainable.
Iceland has for a number of years acknowledged the need for scientific research on whales to gain a better understanding of the interaction between the different whale stocks and other marine species and the role of whales in the marine ecosystem. Therefore, Iceland began implementing a research plan on minke whales in 2003. So far 161 minke whales have been taken and the research plan will be completed in 2007 when the sample size of 200 minke whales has been obtained. Whaling quotas take into account the number of whales that will be taken in the implementation of the research plan, ensuring that total catches will be well within a sustainable level.
Whaling has been strictly managed in Iceland for a long time. Long before any international agreements on whale conservation, the Icelandic Parliament (Althingi) banned all whaling in 1915 after a period of overexploitation from foreign land stations in Iceland during the period 1883-1915. This Icelandic "moratorium" lasted until 1948, apart from some limited catches during the period 1935-1939. Strict rules and limitations were applied to whaling in Iceland which was restricted to small-scale land based operation from 1948 to 1985 when all commercial whaling was again halted following a decision by the International Whaling Commission (IWC).
There are many different whale species and stocks in the world's oceans. Some are in a poor state and in need of protection. However, many whale populations are far from being threatened or endangered. The taking of threatened or endangered whales is certainly not justified and is strongly opposed by Iceland. On the other hand, sustainable takes of animals from abundant populations are consistent with the principle of sustainable development.
The total stock size of Central North-Atlantic minke whales is close to 70,000 animals, of which around 43,600 are in Icelandic coastal waters. Fin whales in the Central North-Atlantic number around 25,800 animals. Both these estimates have been agreed upon by consensus by the Scientific Committees of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). The decision to resume sustainable whaling involves takes of 30 minke whales and nine fin whales, during the fishing year 2006/2007 which ends on August 31 2007. This will bring the total catches of minke whales in Icelandic waters during this fishing year to 69, including the minke whales taken in completing the research plan. These takes equal less than 0.2% of the number of minke whales in Icelandic coastal waters, an even smaller fraction of the total stock, and less than 0.04% of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic. Both are considered to be close to pre-exploitation levels and estimated sustainable annual catch levels are 200 and 400 fin and minke whales, respectively. As the catch limits now issued are much lower, the catches will not have a significant impact on these abundant whale stocks. A responsible management system will ensure that the catch quotas set will not be exceeded. The catches are clearly sustainable and therefore consistent with the principle of sustainable development.
The resumption of sustainable whaling is legal under international law. At the time of the re-entry of Iceland into the IWC, Iceland made a reservation with respect to the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling. As a part of that reservation, Iceland committed itself not to authorise commercial whaling before 2006 and thereafter not to authorise such whaling while progress was being made in negotiating the IWC?s Revised Management Scheme (RMS), a management framework for commercial whaling.
At the IWC?s Annual Meeting in 2005 Iceland went on record expressing its regret that no progress was being made in the RMS discussions. At this years IWC Annual Meeting, Iceland?s judgement of the situation was reconfirmed as the IWC generally agreed that talks on an RMS had reached an impasse. As a result, Iceland?s reservation has taken effect. Therefore, Iceland is no longer bound by the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling. This puts Iceland in the same position as other IWC members that are not bound by the moratorium, such as Norway.
Several countries catch whales. The United States has for instance a five year block quota of 280 bowhead whales from a stock of less than 10,000. Of those who, like Iceland, operate within the IWC the biggest whaling countries by numbers and volume are the United States, Russia, Norway, Japan and Greenland. Like Iceland's, all those whaling operations are sustainable and legal and in accordance with the rules of the IWC.
Attached is an information paper containing some questions and answers regarding the resumption of sustainable whaling in Iceland.
Skip to navigation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions and Answers about sustainable whaling
Resumption of Sustainable Whaling
Questions and Answers
1
Q: What is the importance of sustainable utilisation of living marine resources to Iceland?
A: The Icelandic economy is overwhelmingly dependent on the utilization of living marine resources and fisheries in general constitute around 60% of Iceland?s revenue from exported goods and almost 40% of Icelandic exported goods and services. Substantial whale research, including a series of large scale sightings surveys in the North Atlantic (NASS), has been conducted in Icelandic waters. This series, which covers the period from 1986, demonstrates that fin and minke whales are abundant and can be harvested in a sustainable way.
2
Q: Isn?t sustainable whaling illegal because of the IWC so-called moratorium on commercial whaling?
A: No. For those countries that are bound by the so-called moratorium, commercial whaling is not permitted. There has never been a time when all IWC members have been bound by it.
At the time of the re-entry of Iceland into the International Whaling Commission (IWC), Iceland made a reservation with respect to the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling. As a part of the reservation, Iceland committed itself not to authorise commercial whaling before 2006. Thereafter such whaling would not be authorised while progress was being made in negotiations regarding the IWC?s Revised Management Scheme (RMS), a management framework for sustainable whaling.
At the IWC?s Annual Meeting in 2005 Iceland warned that no progress was being made in the RMS discussions. No objection was raised at the Annual Meeting to Iceland?s statement. At this year?s IWC Annual Meeting, Iceland?s understanding was reconfirmed as the IWC generally agreed that talks on an RMS had reached an impasse. Therefore, the two limitations attached to Iceland?s reservation with respect to the so-called moratorium no longer apply.
Accordingly, Iceland?s reservation is now in effect and Iceland has the legal right to resume sustainable whaling. This puts Iceland in the same position as other IWC members that are not bound by the so-called moratorium, such as Norway.
3
Q: Will Iceland?s decision to resume sustainable whaling not have a negative effect on the negotiations on a Revised Management Scheme (RMS) within the IWC?
A: No. At the time Iceland re-joined the IWC it believed progress was being made in the RMS discussions. Iceland worked hard after re-joining the IWC to bring the IWC closer to finalising an RMS. Unfortunately, this work has proved fruitless as consensus was reached at this years IWC Annual Meeting that the talks on the RMS were at an impasse.
4
Q: Does Iceland have a long whaling history?
A: Utilisation of whale resources has been a traditional part of Iceland?s history, providing an important dietary component throughout the ages. Long before any international agreements on whale conservation the Icelandic Parliament (Althing) banned all whaling in 1915, after a period of overexploitation from foreign land-stations in Iceland during the period 1883-1915. This Icelandic "moratorium" lasted, apart from some limited catches during 1935-1939, until 1948 when a licence was given to a single land-station. When commercial whaling was halted from 1985 it had a negative economic and social impact on communities dependent on whaling. In the years 1985-1989 Iceland conducted a scientific research program, including takes of a limited number of fin and sei whales. No whaling was conducted in the period of 1990-2002. In 2003 Iceland started its implementation of the minke whale research program, including the take of 200 minke whales in the period of 2003-2007. Today 161 minke whales have been taken, thereof 60 in 2006. The implementation of the research plan will be completed in 2007 when the originally determined sample size of 200 minke whales has been achieved.
5
Q: How many whales has Iceland now decided to take?
A: Iceland?s decision to resume sustainable whaling involves the take of 30 minke whales and nine fin whales, during the current Icelandic fishing year which ends on 31 August 2007. Taking into account the 39 minke whales that will be taken in 2007 to complete the implementation of the minke whale research plan, the catches of minke whales will be 69 animals. These takes equal less than 0.2% of the number of minke whales in Icelandic coastal waters, an even smaller fraction of the total stock, and less than 0.04% of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic. Both are considered to be close to pre-exploitation levels and estimated sustainable annual catch levels are 200 and 400 fin and minke whales respectively. As the catch limits now issued are much lower, the catches will not have a significant impact on whale stocks. A responsible management system will ensure that the catch quotas set will not be exceeded. The catches are clearly sustainable and therefore consistent with the principle of sustainable development.
6
Q: Why did Iceland decide to resume sustainable whaling?
A: The position of Iceland has always been that whale stocks should be utilised in a sustainable manner like any other living marine resource.
Icelandic policy on ocean issues is based on maintaining the future health, biodiversity and sustainability of the ocean surrounding Iceland, in order that it may continue to be a resource that supports and promotes the nation?s wellbeing. This involves conservation and management of the resources based on scientific knowledge and guided by respect for the marine ecosystem as a whole.
Abundance estimates for both minke and fin whales around Iceland have been approved both by the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the Scientific Committee of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). Both have been deemed abundant.
7
Q: What will be the effect of the proposed whaling on the whale populations in question?
A: Iceland has in collaboration with neighbouring countries in the North Atlantic conducted large scale sightings surveys at regular intervals since 1987. According to the latest survey, the number of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic is estimated at 25,800 animals and the total stock size of Central North-Atlantic minke whales is close to 70,000 animals, of which around 43,600 are in Icelandic coastal waters. Both these estimates have been agreed upon by consensus by the Scientific Committees of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). Both populations are believed to be close to pre-exploitation levels and estimated sustainable annual catch levels are 200 and 400 fin and minke whales respectively. The catch limits now issued are much lower. Therefore, the catches will not have significant impact on these highly abundant whale populations. A responsible management system will ensure that the catches are sustainable and that catch quotas will not be exceeded.
Regular sightings surveys will be continued to monitor the development of the whale stocks. The next such survey will be conducted in 2007. Catch quotas will be adjusted accordingly to ensure long-term sustainability.
8
Q: Are fin whales not listed as endangered in the IUCN red list of threatened species?
A: The IUCN red list of threatened species is based on a global perspective regarding the status of species. Fin whales have separate populations (stocks) in all the major ocean areas. There is no interchange of whales between major ocean areas.
Such a global perspective, merging independent stocks together, is inconsistent with general practice of scientifically based management of fisheries. The use of IUCN criteria on fin whales in the Central North Atlantic would not lead to their classification as endangered or threatened.
The abundance estimate for fin whales in the Central North Atlantic has been agreed by consensus by the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the Scientific Committee of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). There is agreement within both of these scientific committees that the fin whale is neither endangered nor threatened.
9
Q: Are 69 animals a high proportion of the minke whale stock in Icelandic coastal waters and are nine animals a high proportion of the number of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic?
A: No. The total stock size of Central North-Atlantic minke whales is close to 70,000 animals, of which around 43,600 are in Icelandic costal waters. The number of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic is estimated at around 25,800 animals. These abundance estimates have been agreed by consensus by the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the Scientific Committee of the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). The takes of 69 minke whales and nine fin whales equal less than 0.2% of the minke whales in Icelandic coastal waters and an even smaller fraction of the total stock and less than 0.04% of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic. The catches are clearly sustainable and therefore consistent with the principle of sustainable development.
10
Q: Will the implementation of the current research plan on minke whales be suspended?
A: The implementation of the research plan on minke whales will be completed in 2007 when the targeted sample size of 200 minke whales has been achieved. However, scientific activities will continue in other forms in order to closely monitor the health of Iceland?s marine ecosystem. The catch quotas for minke whales take into account the number of whales that will be taken in the implementation of the research plan, ensuring that total catches will be well within a sustainable level.
11
Q: Is the management of whaling not a job for the International Whaling Commission (IWC)?
A: The IWC has not been able to fulfil its role in the management of whaling as it is obliged to do according to the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. No progress has been made in the RMS discussions within the IWC over the past two years and any further effort was suspended indefinitely after the IWC agreed that talks on the RMS had reached an impasse. Despite the fact that the Scientific Committee of the IWC agreed on the scientific aspects of a management scheme fourteen years ago, there are no signs indicating that the IWC will manage whaling in the foreseeable future.
At the IWC Annual Meeting this year, the so-called St. Kitts and Nevis Declaration was approved by a majority of IWC members. In this declaration it is stated among other things that whale stocks should be utilised in a sustainable way on a scientific basis and that the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling is unnecessary. Furthermore it declares that the IWC can be saved from collapse only by implementing conservation and management measures.
With the IWC?s majority now having come to the conclusion that the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling was unnecessary, the resumption of sustainable whaling is clearly in line with the will of the majority of IWC members.
12
Q: Has the Scientific Committee of the IWC expressed opposition to the proposed catches?
A: The Scientific Committee of the IWC has not discussed this particular decision. However, at this year?s annual meeting the Scientific Committee accepted an abundance estimate of 25,800 fin whales in the Central North Atlantic. The Scientific Committee had previously accepted an abundance estimate of 43,600 for minke whales around Iceland. The allowed catches now constitute less than 0.04% and 0.2% of these accepted estimates for fin and minke whales, respectively, well below generally accepted values for sustainable yield of whale stocks.
13
Q: Will Iceland engage in international trade in whale products obtained in commercial whaling?
A: Whale products should be treated in the same way as any other seafood products. Icelandic whale products are likely to be consumed both domestically and overseas.
Any international trade in Icelandic whale products will be conducted in accordance with Iceland?s obligations under international law.
14
Q: Should the whale products not be consumed domestically rather than be subject to international trade?
A: In Iceland?s view, the question of international trade has no bearing on the management of whaling or whale conservation. What matters is how many whales are taken, not where they are consumed after they are taken.
Iceland does not support the view that international trade is fundamentally bad, neither regarding whale products nor other, legally traded products. Nor does Iceland support trade discrimination between large and small countries.
The sustainability of the catches is determined by the level of the catches and has nothing whatsoever to do with what distance the products are transported before they are used.
However, there are two reasons one can have for opposing international trade in sustainably taken whale products. Firstly, one can feel that only large countries should be allowed to conduct whaling while countries that have small domestic markets should not. Using this discriminatory reasoning, one can for example conclude that large countries such as the USA and Japan can conduct whaling but small countries like Iceland and the Faroe Islands can not. Secondly, one can feel that international trade in general is a bad thing and should be minimised. This anti-capitalist reasoning not only applies to international trade in whale products but to all international trade, such as trade in textiles, food products and industrial products.
Iceland strongly opposes both these arguments. Iceland feels it is important to ensure the sustainability of the utilisation of living marine resources, but this goal should not be used to justify inappropriate trade barriers and trade discrimination.
15
Q: Do the whales suffer when they are caught?
A: The methods used for hunting the whales are the best available. No high-speed chase is involved and most of the animals die without realising that they are being hunted. Statistics from Norway, where the same methods are used, show that around 80% of the animals die instantly upon being hit. An overwhelming majority of the remaining 20% die within minutes. The methods used ensure that the catches are done in the quickest and most humane way possible and that suffering is minimised. In fact, these methods are more effective and humane than those used for hunting other large mammals, such as deer.
16
Q: Is Iceland going against world public opinion by conducting sustainable whaling?
A: No. Several countries catch whales, most of them on a much bigger scale than Iceland. The United States has for instance a five year block quota of 280 bowhead whales from a stock of less than 10,000 animals. Of those who, like Iceland, operate within the International Whaling Commission (IWC) the biggest whaling countries by numbers and volume are the United States, Russia, Norway, Japan and Greenland. Like Iceland?s, all those whaling operations are sustainable and legal and in accordance with the rules of the IWC.
The majority of the members of the International Whaling Commission has clearly expressed its support for sustainable whaling, which is consistent with the principle of sustainable development. Like most countries, Iceland strongly opposes unsustainable whaling operations and supports the protection of whale stocks that are threatened.
17
Q: Are Icelanders in favour of whaling?
A: According to a poll by Gallup from September 2006, around 3/4 of Icelanders, aged 16-75 years, are in favour of sustainable whaling. This is almost exactly the same percentage as in a poll from 1997. Over the same period the proportion of Icelanders opposing whaling has fallen from around 20% to around 10%.
18
Q: Are there reasons to be concerned about the health impacts of whale meat?
A: There are no reasons to fear negative health impacts from consuming whale meat. All marine organisms, particularly long-living species high in the food chain, have measurable levels of contaminants. Relatively high values have been found in some toothed cetaceans, as well as in some commercially exploited fish species such as tuna and halibut. However, baleen whales are at a low level in the food chain. Therefore, they contain pollutants at generally much lower values. Analysis of meat and blubber for pollutants in Icelandic fin and minke whales, both of which are baleen whales, have shown levels well below residue limits stipulated for food.
On the contrary studies have shown whale products to represent high quality food regarding nutrients and bioactive components beneficial for human health. The meat is lean and it?s fat is rich in Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids. Additionally, like other seafood, the meat is of high quality protein and rich in essential minerals and some vitamins. The blubber, a fatty tissue, is very rich in Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids.
19
Q: Is there a reason to believe that sustainable whaling will have a negative impact on tourism in Iceland?
A: Statistics show that the number of tourists to Iceland for the past few years has increased. Iceland?s implementation of a program that includes the taking of whales for scientific purposes does not seem to have affected tourism to Iceland in any way.
20
Q: Will resumption of sustainable whaling hurt whale-watching operations in Iceland?
A: There is no reason to believe that the sustainable whaling will affect the whale-watching industry as whale-watching areas are mostly confined to locations near the harbours of departure. The stocks to be harvested are both highly abundant and distributed over a much wider area.
Whaling and whale-watching can coexist with good cooperation between the parties involved. This has been the case in other countries where whale-watching and whaling are practiced side by side.
Prepared by the Ministry of Fisheries and the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, in October 2006.Revenir en haut
Differents articles publies dans Iceland Review:
10/19/2006 | 12:14
Whaling is affecting tourism
http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandrev ... _id=238383
10/18/2006 | 11:46
Whaling in Iceland permitted
http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandrev ... _id=238109
Whaling Blunder
http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandrev ... _id=238405
Iceland?s Other Red Meat
http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandrev ... _id=238208
10/19/2006 | 12:14
Whaling is affecting tourism
http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandrev ... _id=238383
10/18/2006 | 11:46
Whaling in Iceland permitted
http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandrev ... _id=238109
Whaling Blunder
http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandrev ... _id=238405
Iceland?s Other Red Meat
http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandrev ... _id=238208
La première prise
Apparemment ça n'a pas traîné !
Si je comprends bien, la première baleine a été prise ce week-end :
http://www.mbl.is/mm/frettir/frett.html?nid=1230083
Quelqu'un peut-il nous faire un résumé du commentaire ?
Chris.
Si je comprends bien, la première baleine a été prise ce week-end :
http://www.mbl.is/mm/frettir/frett.html?nid=1230083
Quelqu'un peut-il nous faire un résumé du commentaire ?
Chris.
10/23/2006 | 12:11
First whale caught
Hvalur 9, the Icelandic whaler, caught its first fin whale off the coast of Snaefellsnes peninsula on Saturday.
According to captain and shooter, Sigurdur Njálsson, the 60-ton beast died immediately. The whale meat, around 20 tons, will be sold to Japan. This is reported in all the main media.
Minister of Fisheries, Einar K. Gudfinnsson, told Fréttabladid that he was happy with the catch. At this time of year fin whales have usually left for warmer waters.
After delivering the kill to Hvalstödin whale station, Hvalur 9 headed out to sea again. The whale hunters have permission to hunt another eight fin whales.
The international community has criticized Iceland?s decision to resume commercial whaling. UK?s Minister of Fisheries, Ben Bradshaw, told RÚV fin whales are on the brink of extinction.
Gísli Víkingsson of Iceland?s Marine Institute disagrees. He explained to RÚV that the fin whale stock in Icelandic waters is not in any danger of extinction, although it might be in other parts of the world.
voila pour ce qui est de la premier baleine pechee maintenant pour la valeur commerciale:
by Captain Paul Watson: A whale is a very valuable commodity in Japan. Iceland has smuggled whale meat to Japan in the past, and will most likely smuggle whale meat to Japan again. One Minke whale could easily fetch $200,000US on the Japanese market, so 38 Minke whales represents a value of $7.6 million US. Perhaps Iceland could make its costs available to the public and then reveal the income from whale meat sales. If sold domestically, one whale could easily yield 20,000 kilos of meat, and if sold for only a conservative cost of $2US per kilo, each whale would bring in $40,000US, and 38 whales would yield more than $1.5 million US. Money will be made, if not they would not be doing it.
Extrait de http://www.seashepherd.org/editorials/e ... 825_1.html
First whale caught
Hvalur 9, the Icelandic whaler, caught its first fin whale off the coast of Snaefellsnes peninsula on Saturday.
According to captain and shooter, Sigurdur Njálsson, the 60-ton beast died immediately. The whale meat, around 20 tons, will be sold to Japan. This is reported in all the main media.
Minister of Fisheries, Einar K. Gudfinnsson, told Fréttabladid that he was happy with the catch. At this time of year fin whales have usually left for warmer waters.
After delivering the kill to Hvalstödin whale station, Hvalur 9 headed out to sea again. The whale hunters have permission to hunt another eight fin whales.
The international community has criticized Iceland?s decision to resume commercial whaling. UK?s Minister of Fisheries, Ben Bradshaw, told RÚV fin whales are on the brink of extinction.
Gísli Víkingsson of Iceland?s Marine Institute disagrees. He explained to RÚV that the fin whale stock in Icelandic waters is not in any danger of extinction, although it might be in other parts of the world.
voila pour ce qui est de la premier baleine pechee maintenant pour la valeur commerciale:
by Captain Paul Watson: A whale is a very valuable commodity in Japan. Iceland has smuggled whale meat to Japan in the past, and will most likely smuggle whale meat to Japan again. One Minke whale could easily fetch $200,000US on the Japanese market, so 38 Minke whales represents a value of $7.6 million US. Perhaps Iceland could make its costs available to the public and then reveal the income from whale meat sales. If sold domestically, one whale could easily yield 20,000 kilos of meat, and if sold for only a conservative cost of $2US per kilo, each whale would bring in $40,000US, and 38 whales would yield more than $1.5 million US. Money will be made, if not they would not be doing it.
Extrait de http://www.seashepherd.org/editorials/e ... 825_1.html
Et de deux...
Article extrait de http://www.grapevine.is
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Two Down, Seven to Go: Iceland Catches Second Fin Whale
by Virginia Zech
Tuesday, October 24, Icelandic whaling boat Hvalur 9 brought in the company?s second fin whale catch this week. This follows the declaration issued earlier this month by the Ministry of Fisheries that Iceland would resume commercial hunting of the species. A quota of nine animals over the coming year has been set for fin whales. An additional limit has been made for thirty minke whales over the same time period. While Iceland has been whaling minke for scientific purposes since 2003, the recent fin whale captures mark Iceland?s first in two decades.
Fin whales are the world?s second largest whale species. The first brought in by Hvalur was measured at 20-21 meters long, their second spoil is reported to be smaller. Though controversy surrounding Iceland?s whaling efforts seems to have swelled with the size of the animals she is catching, the Ministry of Fisheries defends the decision to resume whaling efforts for export.
Heavy, often negative, publicity has followed Iceland?s recent fin whale catches. Anti-whaling and environmental organizations like Greenpeace continue to denounce the catches. Defending their right to engage in hunting the giant mammals, Ministry of Fisheries statements note that several other countries worldwide currently engage in whaling. Nations with either scientific or commercial whale hunting programs include the United States, Norway, Japan, Greenland, and Russia.
?Estimated sustainable annual catch levels are 200 and 400 fin and minke whales, respectively. As the catch limits now issued are much lower, the catches will not have a significant impact on these abundant whale stocks,? a Ministry of Fisheries press release states. The Ministry also points out historical examples of Iceland abstaining from whaling when stocks have been low as evidence of long-standing concern over sustainable policies in whaling.
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Two Down, Seven to Go: Iceland Catches Second Fin Whale
by Virginia Zech
Tuesday, October 24, Icelandic whaling boat Hvalur 9 brought in the company?s second fin whale catch this week. This follows the declaration issued earlier this month by the Ministry of Fisheries that Iceland would resume commercial hunting of the species. A quota of nine animals over the coming year has been set for fin whales. An additional limit has been made for thirty minke whales over the same time period. While Iceland has been whaling minke for scientific purposes since 2003, the recent fin whale captures mark Iceland?s first in two decades.
Fin whales are the world?s second largest whale species. The first brought in by Hvalur was measured at 20-21 meters long, their second spoil is reported to be smaller. Though controversy surrounding Iceland?s whaling efforts seems to have swelled with the size of the animals she is catching, the Ministry of Fisheries defends the decision to resume whaling efforts for export.
Heavy, often negative, publicity has followed Iceland?s recent fin whale catches. Anti-whaling and environmental organizations like Greenpeace continue to denounce the catches. Defending their right to engage in hunting the giant mammals, Ministry of Fisheries statements note that several other countries worldwide currently engage in whaling. Nations with either scientific or commercial whale hunting programs include the United States, Norway, Japan, Greenland, and Russia.
?Estimated sustainable annual catch levels are 200 and 400 fin and minke whales, respectively. As the catch limits now issued are much lower, the catches will not have a significant impact on these abundant whale stocks,? a Ministry of Fisheries press release states. The Ministry also points out historical examples of Iceland abstaining from whaling when stocks have been low as evidence of long-standing concern over sustainable policies in whaling.
Mais qu'en pensent les Islandais ?
Un sondage Gallup vient de montrer que 40 % des Islandais désapprouvent aujourd'hui la reprise de la chasse à la baleine, alors que 42 % l'approuvent et 18 % sont sans opinion.
Forte progression des opposants ! En septembre dernier, 11 % seulement étaient contre, 75 % étaient pour, et 14 % indécis ... Mais certains pensent que ce sondage était "téléguidé" ...
Il faut dire quand même qu'il avait été fait pour le compte de la fédération des propriétaires de bateaux de pêche ... ! hum hum ... !?
Chris.
Forte progression des opposants ! En septembre dernier, 11 % seulement étaient contre, 75 % étaient pour, et 14 % indécis ... Mais certains pensent que ce sondage était "téléguidé" ...
Il faut dire quand même qu'il avait été fait pour le compte de la fédération des propriétaires de bateaux de pêche ... ! hum hum ... !?Chris.
Post un peu long à lire...
Mon avis qui n'engage que moi :
Je pense qu'il y a baleine et baleine et pêche et peche.
Par exemple j'ai pu assister à une pêche à la baleine aux Feroés l'été dernier.
Hé bien ce sont des globicephales et non des baleines comme notre imaginaire nous le fait croire.
Second point, cette pêche est non commerciale, chaque habitant du lieu de peche recoit gratuitement 1 kilo de viande, c'est toujours appréciable lorsque l'on connait la vie au Féroés.
Enfin ceci n'a lieu qu'occasionellement (2-3 fois par an), lorsque celles-ci sont à proximité des cotes
Donc j pense qu'il faudrait arreter de crier au loup sans connaitre la vie réelle (traditions , conditions quotidiennes) et la manière dont cela est pratiqué
Mon avis qui n'engage que moi :
Je pense qu'il y a baleine et baleine et pêche et peche.
Par exemple j'ai pu assister à une pêche à la baleine aux Feroés l'été dernier.
Hé bien ce sont des globicephales et non des baleines comme notre imaginaire nous le fait croire.
Second point, cette pêche est non commerciale, chaque habitant du lieu de peche recoit gratuitement 1 kilo de viande, c'est toujours appréciable lorsque l'on connait la vie au Féroés.
Enfin ceci n'a lieu qu'occasionellement (2-3 fois par an), lorsque celles-ci sont à proximité des cotes
Donc j pense qu'il faudrait arreter de crier au loup sans connaitre la vie réelle (traditions , conditions quotidiennes) et la manière dont cela est pratiqué
Over the hills and far away...
Baleine et baleines ...
Tu as raison, Edge : il y a baleines et baleines ...
Par exemple, les baleines de Minke (ou petits rorquals) ne sont absolument pas menacées d'extinction, au contraire elles ont proliféré dans les eaux islandaises et on estime qu'il y en a environ 55 000 autour de l'île. Avec un prélèvement d'une trentaine par an, on ne met pas en péril l'espèce. Cette chasse est donc compatible avec la notion de "développement durable".
Par contre, pour ce qui concerne la consommation de viande de mammifères marins aux Feroe (ou ailleurs ...), ça craint un peu ... :
Depuis le temps qu'on déverse impunément tout un tas de saletés et notamment des métaux lourds (mercure, etc ...) dans les océans, les mammifères marins de l'arctique (qui sont au sommet de la chaîne alimentaire) sont truffées de ces substances toxiques.
On commence à en prendre conscience, et aux îles Feroe, par exemple, la consommation de viande de mammifères marins est interdite aux femmes enceintes. Le kilo de viande gratuite est donc peut-être un peu un cadeau empoisonné ...
Chris.
Par exemple, les baleines de Minke (ou petits rorquals) ne sont absolument pas menacées d'extinction, au contraire elles ont proliféré dans les eaux islandaises et on estime qu'il y en a environ 55 000 autour de l'île. Avec un prélèvement d'une trentaine par an, on ne met pas en péril l'espèce. Cette chasse est donc compatible avec la notion de "développement durable".
Par contre, pour ce qui concerne la consommation de viande de mammifères marins aux Feroe (ou ailleurs ...), ça craint un peu ... :
Depuis le temps qu'on déverse impunément tout un tas de saletés et notamment des métaux lourds (mercure, etc ...) dans les océans, les mammifères marins de l'arctique (qui sont au sommet de la chaîne alimentaire) sont truffées de ces substances toxiques.
On commence à en prendre conscience, et aux îles Feroe, par exemple, la consommation de viande de mammifères marins est interdite aux femmes enceintes. Le kilo de viande gratuite est donc peut-être un peu un cadeau empoisonné ...
Chris.