A feud between Japan and the newly elected government of Australia is growing as the Japanese whaling fleet has moved into Antarctic waters to conduct their yearly whale hunt. The usual eco-loons have called for the deployment of the Royal Australian Navy to intercept the Japanese whaling fleet. The new Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has instead decided to deploy a customs boat and surveillance aircraft to follow the Japanese whaling boats. The Australian government claims the boat and aircraft will be used to gather evidence to bring the Japanese to an international court over their whaling activities.
This is simple appeasement of the eco-loons at the expense of the Japanese because what the Japanese are doing is perfectly legal. The Japanese through the International Whaling Commission which Australia is part of, sets yearly quotas for the Japanese to whale in the name of scientific research. If someone is concerned about the Japanese whaling activities then why not work through the IWC to change the whaling quotas for the Japanese? The ones conducting illegal activities are the eco-loons who attack the Japanese ships causing property damage and injuries of Japanese crewmen by throwing acid at them. By the Australian government deploying government assets to intercept the Japanese whaling fleet legitimizes the violent actions of the eco-loons.
So why is the Australian government doing this? I think because it is a simple way to appease the eco-loons while calculating that the Japanese will do nothing in response. Does anyone think this same action would be taken if the whalers were Chinese? Notice these eco-loons and the Australian government are not attacking or gathering evidence against the northern Europeans who do not have any IWC mandated quotas and openly whale commercially.
I don’t like whaling, but I don’t like eating horses either which a lot of culture take part in thus I find the whole bashing of Japan over their whaling activities highly hypocritical. The Japanese have a population of a 128 million, but their home islands can only produce food for 40% of their population. That is why seafood has always been a staple of the Japanese diet. It seems very hypocritical that people from western countries like Australia that have small populations, but abundant land to grow food on to criticize the Japanese for providing food for their own population. If these countries don’t want the Japanese to harvest whales through the legal means that the IWC has allowed them to, then why don’t these nations provide the equivalent amount of food free of charge to Japan?
What is so ridiculous about this whole debate is that few Japanese eat whale meat in the first place. Historically the Japanese have whaled in historically low numbers. It seems very hypocritical that the western nations that were responsible for whales reaching the point of extinction in the first place due to the heavy demand of whale oil, are condemning Japan now for the low level of whaling they continue to do. As a matter of fact, many cities along the coast of Australia were actually founded by whalers. Australia’s early economy was based on whaling before agriculture took hold to become the main export.
This leads to my next point that Australia is further hypocritical because of the clearing of land in Australia for agriculture to feed their population and for export has led to massive deforestation and environmental damage leading to the extinction of numerous Australian species with more species being threatened with extinction today. One of the national icons of Australia, the koala is now a threatened species with only 100,000 left in the wild due to the loss of habitat. In another outspoken anti-whaling nation New Zealand, their national icon the kiwi bird is quickly approaching extinction with only 20,000 left in the wild. At the current rate of decline the kiwi will be extinct in approximately 20 years. Once again this is brought on by loss of habitat in New Zealand.
The numbers of both of these national icons are far lower than the total number of minke whales which total 184,000 left in the wild that the Japanese are whaling for. The Japanese are not causing whales to go extinct if they stick to the whaling quota given to them by the IWC, but national icons of both Australia and New Zealand are going extinct. So how come no one is protesting and demanding these nations protect these animals? So how come no one is gathering evidence on these nations to bring them to an international court? The answer is obvious because it would be ridiculous, but in the case of Japan since they are international punching bags it is okay to do so to them.
Can anyone imagine what the reaction would be in Australia or New Zealand if Japanese protesters came and started attacking farmers, loggers, and real estate developers to protect koalas and kiwis? Better yet what would these nations think if the Japanese military or governmental assets were mobilized to monitor the protection of these species?
The ironic thing about all of this, is that the actions of the environmental movement have in fact made it more likely that more whales will be hunted in the future. In response to the anti-whaling attacks the Japanese government has turned the whaling issue into one of nationalism by wanting their people to stand up against the western hypocrites. The Japanese government has now included whale meat in school lunches in show of solidarity with the whalers. Also many Japanese want to make a stand with whales because if they don’t the eco-loons will be emboldened to find another species to advocate for like tuna, which is a fish that the majority of Japanese people do eat.
If the environmentalists had actually approached this issue in a mature manner through the IWC like a suggested, the eating of whale meat probably would have naturally died off in Japan because the older people that grew up eating it would eventually age and pass away over the years thus reducing the financial incentive to whale. Now due to the eco-loons, a whole new generation of Japanese children will now grow up eating whale meat.
What is further interesting about this, is that this issue is something that Koreans and Japanese actually share a common interest in. Koreans have long been condemned for eating dogs in much the same way the Japanese are being criticized for eating whales. Few people in Korea eat dogs, but due to the attacks on Korea from the eco-loons the eating of dogs has become an issue of nationalism as well. The practice of eating dogs would have probably died out naturally over the years much like the Japanese eating whales, but the do gooder eco-loons had to get involved. Their actions have probably assurred both practices will continue for some time. Way to go environmental movement. People wonder why I can’t stand the eco-loons.
Popularity: 5%
8:06 am on December 21st, 2007 1
I’m against whale hunting. Are they still using the harpoons to hook the whales?
Having said that, I find the American response to this issue to be a typical “let’s fight the establishment” sentiment. You can expect the inevitable parallel drawn up between whale hunting and Japanese war atrocities, suspicions about Japanese whaling companies hiding behind the veil of “tradition” to justify making profits out of whale meat, and the oversimplified (almost imperialist) attitude that Japan should embrace enlightenment by rejecing tradtions that conflicts with modern standards.
One of the actresses from the show “Heroes” went to Japan to protest whale hunting and even made a show of crying in camera. She told the American media something to the effect of “bad traditions should change” LOL. Questionable or not, she probably understands next to nothing about Japanese culture. But it doesn’t readily subscribe to some liberal agenda, so it can be dismissed with a wave of a hand.
10:32 am on December 21st, 2007 2
I don’t like whale hunting either but I understand why the Japanese do it just like I understand why Koreans eat dog meat. As long as it is done humanely and they are not over harvesting the species then I don’t have a problem with it even though I don’t like it.
The reaction of the eco-loons has only made the situation worse but they feel better about themselves and I’m sure their sponsorship money is growing and growing the more outrageous they become.
11:21 am on December 21st, 2007 3
I, for one, am GLAD to see somebody doing something about the pesky global whale infestation.
2:14 pm on December 21st, 2007 4
You shouldn’t even call them “eco loons,” since the whale species hunted are not in the slightest bit threated with extinction, and some like the Minke Whale are very abundant. This is animal rights activism falsely calling itself environmentalism.
4:53 pm on December 21st, 2007 5
I don’t even know if they should even be considered animal rights activists because they sure don’t care about the plight of koalas or the kiwi bird. Most of the followers of the eco-faith are just ignorant while the leaders are demagogues.
5:50 pm on December 21st, 2007 6
I object to Japan’s Antarctic whale hunting for these reasons:
1. I think it’s wrong for countries to impose their culture on areas 1000s of kms away. Japan often plays the victim and whines about how Western nations are unfairly imposing their values on Japan in regards to whaling. The truth is the opposite. Japan is imposing it’s values and culture on the Antarctic… a pristine wilderness area that does NOT belong to Japan. There may be agreements that allow this to happen but I believe such agreements are wrong and need to be amended.
2. In my opinion, Japanese “food culture” DOES NOT and SHOULD NOT extend to the Antarctic. These marathon Victorian-era style voyages half-way around the globe are ludicrous in this day and age. The Japanese often trot out the argument of how they undertake whaling because they just want to protect their traditional local food culture… since when did their food culture stretch all the way to the Antarctic?! They should stick to catching whales in their own coastal or near-coastal waters if the they want to protect a local food culture.
3. Trotting 1000s of kms around the globe emits tonnes of greenhouse gases unnecessarily. Catch them near your own country and cut those emissions.
4. Many people, me included, think that they have a right to have the whales live undisturbed in the Antarctic. Why should Japan have a “right to take” which automatically trumps my rights? I understand there are agreements but I think these agreements are wrong. I believe more and more people are feeling this way and in the future people will increasingly demand that their rights be taken account of. This automatic “right to take” in international waters, which trumps everyone else’s rights is absurd in this day and age.
6:52 pm on December 21st, 2007 7
Australia/New Zealand do not have a perfect record re environmental issues - but they have a much better record than many countries. Do they go within reach of Japan to harvest food for themselves? Country/population size is not the issue. That is for Japan to control.
10:06 pm on December 21st, 2007 8
1:49 am on December 22nd, 2007 9
Do you suppose the Japanese would be willing to allow Americans to go dynamite fishing in international waters off the coast of Japan?
Redneck fishing culture must be protected!
2:55 pm on December 22nd, 2007 10
To AGuyInJapan,
Yes Japan doesn’t own the Antarctic but neither do you or the rest of the eco-loons. If you don’t like the Japanese violating your so called “rights” then why should you expect the Japanese to have their same rights violated by you? That is why international agreements are reached to determine what people can do in the Antarctic which the Japanese are in full compliance with.
Your greenhouse gas comment is humorous when compared to the amount of greenhouse emissions that come from cattle grazing in Australia.
To GR,
NZ and Australia do not need to go to Japan to get food because like I said they have huge lands to grow food for their own populations, which brings back to my argument that these countries are causing massive environmental damage because of their farming and grazing activities compared to the Japanese that are committing no environmental damage hunting whales that are not endangered.
12:59 am on December 23rd, 2007 11
a few points.
comparing eating horse or dog with whales is misleading. i know many people do have an irrational gut reaction like this but there are other significant logical reasons for not hunting whales. namely:
1) they are in a “whale sanctuary”. that should mean something. just like a reserve for elephants shouldnt be infringed on because i happen to want some ivory trinkets.
2) whilst not all whale species are no longer critically endangered, populations are still a miniscule percentage of historical levels. lets let them build up a bit. we live in an incredibly naturally impoverished world already.
3) increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide are being absorbed by the oceans. very soon, it is predicted, a threshold will be reached where many microfauna will no longer be able to produce calcium based skeletal structures. ie. too much carbon, no bio-calcification, no base of food web, no krill means most of the oceans biome including whales will be in deep shit. needless over hunting could be that straw to break the camels back in light of this.
4) koreans tend to kill dogs in inhumane ways (the prior beating). much as this disgusts me, slowing killing a large intelligent social mammal (whales) for up to half an hour is way more unacceptable. if we are gonna eat meat, lets avoid unnecessary suffering.
a better analogy than dog or horse or kangaroos (which anti-anti-whaling morons always seem to bring up) would be fishing the highly endangered golden ruffy ( which you can still buy in australian supermarkets) - this is on par with selling panda steaks, from elderly pandas.
further points.
THE ISSUE IS NOT IMPORTANT FOR THE AVERAGE JAPANESE BUT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE AVERAGE AUSTRALIAN.
i have lived in japan the last 3 years. the average japanese has never had whale and those who have dont particularly like it. they dont care one way or another. as with most political decisions, this one is being made by grumpy old men stuck in their ways. this is about saving face. once they have decided on a path, to change it would mean to accept they were wrong - or even worse - to have to take orders from the gaijin. as for australians, many of the animals under contention migrate through australian waters or live in australias arctic territory (not recognised internationally, but hey) and hence they feel a sense of stewardship.
KOALAS AND KIWIS ARE NOT ENDANGERED DUE TO HABITAT LOSS.
kiwis are in trouble due to introduced predators (cats, foxes, and recently australian possums). koalas are not endangered. there is strong evidence that populations were historically very low (due to the ease with which an aborigine could spot and spear a big drowsy bag of meat hanging in a tree like dogs balls). there are many highly endangered australian mammals, of which i am sure you are ignorant of their existence, let alone the causes and solutions to their troubled situation. furthermore, both governments have enormous resources devoted to conservation efforts to reverse the damage that has been done. a lot of it is ineffective due to the intractable problems of controlling or eradicating feral species. on the other hand, japan is devoting resources to destruction the largest organisms that have ever lived.
LAND CLEARING IS BAD. SO WHAT?
the issue at hand is whaling. australia has an awful record in regard to both ( whaling and land management). however, through democratic processes and an engaged citizenry we are changing for the better. japan has a scary tendency where once something institutional starts it keeps steam-rolling until crisis.
SCIENTIFIC WHALING IS BOGUS.
japan is making use of a legal loophole. that law was made for the intent of genuine research. all data they collect can be gathered without killing the animals. and of the more than 15 years of publications, almost none are of any legitimate scientific value. scientific whaling is a hearty one-fingered salute to multilateral agreement and has done enormous damage to japans relations with the rest of the world.
WHALE MEAT CONTAINS DANGEROUS LEVELS OF HEAVY METALS.
even assuming the hunt is legit and ethical, the meat is not fit for human consumption.
WHALE MEAT IS A VERY INSIGNIFICANT COMPONENT OF THE JAPANESE DIET. thus, your rant about hypercritical australians with lots of land is bogus. japanese have a much larger ecological footprint than the size of japan. they have kept this imbalance afloat thru aggressive exporting of high-tech gadgets and porn. i wish them the best of luck in the future. however, whales just dont enter into the equation.
IN JAPAN EATING WHALE IS AS TRADITIONAL AS DRESSING LIKE ELVIS. only a lot less popular. postwar, under american guidance, whale hunting helped provide desperately needed nutrition for an impoverished, carpet bombed nation. current japan is a completely different kettle of fish.
3:25 pm on December 23rd, 2007 12
1. The whales are in international waters. Elephants are on land in a sovereign country. The Japanese are not whaling in Australian waters.
2. The whales being hunted are not at their historic high levels but their not endangered either. That is why the Japanese follow a quota by the IWC to allow them to whale responsibly unlike when the western world hunted them to near extinction for oil.
3. This point actually supports whaling because if krill is running low in the oceans then it makes sense to then out the whale population before they starve to death.
4. I clearly said in comment #2 that they should be harvested humanely and not over harvesting. How else you kill a whale besides an explosive harpoon like the Japanese do is beyond me.
“KOALAS AND KIWIS ARE NOT ENDANGERED DUE TO HABITAT LOSS.”
This is clearly false. Introduced species such as the possum killing kiwis goes hand in hand with their reduced habitat. The Maori guide I had at Te Puia told me specifically that kiwi birds are being killed just as much by being road kill as they are by possums because in many areas they no longer have vasts forests to hide and forage in thus exposing them to predators and having to cross roads. Within years only certain areas on the south island will even have wild kiwis any more.
It is much the same problem with koalas. Less habitat means they have to move around more to get food which causes them to cross roads and become road kill and makes them vulnerable to dogs. The Australian Koala Foundation clearly states this:
https://www.savethekoala.com/koalasendangered.html
The Tasmanian Devil population is being ravished by a facial tumor disease due to decreased habitat causing inbreeding and a lack of genetic diversity. The list goes on and on.
“LAND CLEARING IS BAD. SO WHAT?”
Australians clear land to provide food for Australians as well as for export markets. This has greatly effected the environment in Australia. Japan only whales for their domestic market with no massive adverse effects on the environment because they follow a strict quota system set by the IWC.
If you think Australia is changing for the better you might want to take a trip to rural Australia especially the Western Australian wheat belt to see how the land clearing is devestating the environment:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2000/10/1011_salt.html
I can think of many environmental issues in Australia that are far more serious than the whale issue and yet little is done about it.
“SCIENTIFIC WHALING IS BOGUS”
It is not bogus because it authorized by the IWC. If eco-loons don’t like it change the law instead of ramming Japanese boats and throwing acid at their sailors. At least the Japanese are working with the international community through the IWC which the northern Europeans are not with their open commercial whaling which for some reason the eco-loons do not seem to concerned about.
“WHALE MEAT CONTAINS DANGEROUS LEVELS OF HEAVY METALS.”
That is up to the choice of the Japanese consumer not the eco-loons to determine.
“WHALE MEAT IS A VERY INSIGNIFICANT COMPONENT OF THE JAPANESE DIET. ”
I clearly said in my posting the vast majority of Japanese do not eat whale but the actions of the eco-loons have turned it into an issue of nationalism for the Japanese that will ensure they keep eating whale. Way to go eco-loons.
2:09 am on December 25th, 2007 13
1. yes, its international waters. and yes, technically the IWC grants japan permission. but, the vote-rigging and fradulent use of “science” to continue commercial whaling renders the institution a farce. as international waters, nations have a right to voice their opposition - it is not japans soveriegn right.
2. i think we are agreeing here.
“3. This point actually supports whaling because if krill is running low in the oceans then it makes sense to then out the whale population before they starve to death.” so following this reasoning, we should do some more sarin gas bomb attacks to thin out the japanese population before their “tradional” source of food disappears. r u trying to be funny?
4. if they cant be killed humanely, then dont kill them!!! it could be argued that it is a more ethical option to eat an animal that has lived a free life than say, eating KFC battery-reared chicken who live miserable lives. but, the drawn out death is a serious problem. and if brain size is to be used as a rough gauge of intelligence, self-awareness etc - whales will be a bit up the scale over inbred docile farm animals.
HABITAT LOSS
loss of habitat does have negative impacts for koalas and kiwis, but the biggy is other organisms. again, the devil problem is biological (not a landscape managment issue). the devils have a rare and interesting cancer that is contagious - this is not related to inbreeding or landclearing. 70% of tasmania is forest reserve, and this is without the traditional fire-stick farming of the extinct tasmanian aboriginal culture - so habitat is not a problem. i think you should conceed when and where you dont know shit from shinola. as i said, there are many soon to be extinct animals and plants in australia - some of which the main cause is landclearing - and almost all of which you know nothing about. the koaka foundation is a bunch of lamington-drive old ladies who like cute little teddybear animals. the koala recieves the attention because it is cute - not because it is in a dire situation. some populations on islands are actually in need of culling because the damage they are doing to trees, but this sensible measure is politically out of the question. furthermore, australian landclearing is for the purpose of exporting agricultural and forestry products - japan being our biggest customer, and hence they are equally culpable in the descruction.
the landclearing is awful, and ( i will agree with you on this) a bigger problem than killing a few whales. but this is not the issue we are debating.
i think japan shouldnt whale and i think it is great that the australian public and body politic are stirring the shitpot with this one.
also, you are spot on about it being pushed into an issue of nationalism. it should have just been a another decision made in the machinations of beaurocracy long ago and nobody in japan would have noticed or cared. the fact that other countries applied pressure, insulted and then galvanised the fisheries people. so now we are stuck with this ludicrous situation.
7:32 am on December 25th, 2007 14
1. Vote rigging? All the anti-whaling nations can promise aid to nations that make up the IWC just as easily as the Japanese. Using your logic the entire United Nations is a farce which then I would agree with. Yes people can voice their opposition against Japanese whaling but they don’t have the right to ram Japanese boats and throw acid at them causing injuries. The opposition would have a whole lot more credibility if they protested the north Europeans as actively as they do the Japanese.
3. In America deer are hunted because if they are not thinned out they will starve to death. In Australia culling of kangaroos has happened before because their numbers were to high and numbers of them were starving to death:
http://www.education.theage.com.au/pagedetail.asp?intpageid=867&strsection=students&intsectionid=0
Also brain size has nothing to do with intelligence as studies have shown:
http://www.highnorth.no/Library/Myths/br-si-bo.htm
Habitat Loss:
As far as the devil goes take a look at this map where the diseased devils are located:
http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/LBUN-5QF86G?open
Do you think it is just a coincidence that the diseased devils started where the population center of Tasmania is located and did not start where the large protected world heritage area is?
As far as koalas I know you are referring to kangaroo island where their has been talks to cull them. The koalas thrive on kangaroo island because of the abundant bushland and the fact they don’t have to travel long distance in between forests to find food that exposes them to being hit by cars or killed by dogs. The koalas probably won’t be an issue on the island now with the bushfires that ravaged the island this year.
Nevertheless since you believe the number of koalas are not a problem even though they are a near threatened species then you have to concede the number of whales being hunted isn’t a problem either. I also find it interesting how you dismiss the koala foundation for wanting to protect cute animals when the same logic can be used to dismiss the anti-whaling eco-loons as well.
Also the fact that Japan buys much of the forestry products from Australia I am well aware of and another point of conflict I have with eco-loons. There is a big movement by the eco-loons to stop the Gunns mill in Tasmania and reduce logging in general in Australia. We have the same problem in America with our tree huggers as well as Canada.
However, the tree huggers have actually caused more trees to be cut down due to their activities. If responsible nations like Australia, America, or Canada are not providing lumber for nations like Japan they will turn to other countries like Indonesia, PNG, or Brazil that do not replant the trees they cut. So if the tree huggers stop Gunns then the Japanese will have to turn to somewhere else like Borneo to get lumber where the trees will not be replanted. Once again way to go eco-loons.
Also I have lived in Australia, visit frequently, and follow what is going on there. I have yet to meet an Australian that has traveled around Australia more than I have. It has always amazed me how many Australians have never been to Kakadu or even Uluru but it seems like all Australians have been to Thailand and Bali.
That is probably why so few are concerned with the bigger environmental problems in Australia as they are with whaling. Take a hike up the Stirling Ranges or even Google Earth it and see how many salt lakes have risen from the land clearing. It is shocking. There are much larger environmental issues in Australia yet for example the Channel 9 website has a petition to stop the Japanese whale “slaughter” but I have yet to see a petition to address the “slaughter” of the Australian environment from land clearing.
2:44 pm on December 25th, 2007 15
brain size does has something to do with intelligence. obviously other factors are at play. which is why some bird species like crows exhibit complaex intelligent behaviours and yet have comparatively small brains. nonetheless, a mouse is smarter than a nemotode and i would bet a whale would be a lot more switched on than a jersey cow. anyway, this is nitpicking on the side. the main point was it is cruel to kill an intelligent social animal very slowly.
habitat loss is a bad thing, i never said it wasnt. your choice of examples speak volumes about your ignorance though. koalas are not endangered and as i said, there is strong evidence that they have had very dispersed low populations for the last 40000years of human settelement anyway. the australian animals that have gone extinct in the last 200 years or will soon are predominantly smaller desert mammals. habitat alteration is not an issue in these cases. its introduced species.
the obvious solution is for japan and everyone else to use less raw materials - not to choose between SE Asian rainforest and first world plantation.
devils. what connection are you trying to draw between a random mutation in the genome allowing cancerous polyps to become contagious and tasmanian people? you are clutching at straws. why not concede you were typing out of your arse on something you dont know much about?
the gunns mill is a bad move as the company is bad itself. more pollution, more industrial forestry. i am all for cultivating a truely sustainable forestry industry - but gunns is way off track in this regard - poison baiting, massive soil erosion due to clear felling, monoculture plantation replacing biologically rich ecosystems. they may get 1 or 2 harvests from their agroforestry programs and then that land will be barren (like much of the midlands are already). opposing this is ecoloon. it is rational and ethical.
yes, australians have a terrible record with land management. social enertia and environmental processes already in motion will mean that many problems will get worse before they get better. opinions, policy and action are changing for the better though. this is a stark contrast to japan. japanese are largely ignorant of the unseen effects their lifestyle has on the outside world. and they continue to perceive modernity as a concrete wonderland. anyway, once again, this is off track. the issue is japanese whaling. australians should be doing more to manage natural resources at home. but this does not exclude their democratic right to express their opinion and fight what they rightly perceive to be an unnecessary, cruel and outdated practice (killing whales).
7:06 am on December 26th, 2007 16
“use less raw materials?” Japan is one of the best recycling nations I have seen but with a population of 128 million people on those islands people need wood products. Plus Japan’s consumption of wood is going to be miniscule with the resources that China and India will consume as there economies grow and modernize. Wood is going to need to come from somewhere and due to the eco-loons that wood is probably going to come from areas that will not be replanted.
I never said Koalas are an endangered species they are a threatened species
http://www.iucnredlist.org/search/details.php/16892/all
75 years ago there was 8 million koalas in the wild and now there is roughly 100,000 which is less than whales species the Japanese are hunting.
http://www.sandiegozoo.org/animalbytes/t-koala.html
Where are the petitions on Channel 9 to save koalas? The kiwi is even in much more dire straights in NZ. The Maori seemed to be the only ones concerned with that. Saving whales is not about conservation or the environment it is about feelings.
11:11 am on December 26th, 2007 17
Face it, GI… regardless of other animals’ populations, other country’s track records, eco-loons’ dogmatic focus, Japanese traditions, etc., it’s awful hard to give good reasons to kill whales minding their own business in the wild.
Babies look tasty and there are certainly way too many of them (far outnumbering whales)… but most members of society just can’t bring themselves to stick ‘em with a fork and eat ‘em because it just doesn’t seem like the correct thing to do.
While it is certainly possible to show the faults of the eco-loons, their idiocy doesn’t make whale hunting right.
Championing whale hunting takes away from your main point that eco-loons are… well… loons.
“Saving whales is not about conservation or the environment it is about feelings.”
There is some truth to this… and, if one spends a bit of time with whales, one may develop some of the same feelings toward them as with dogs. With education and experience, normal, non-psychopathic folks just find it hard to advocate the torture and killing of large, social, intelligent animals.
This is not bad… it’s this same empathy for another living thing that keeps most of us from being serial killers.
2:10 am on December 29th, 2007 18
To GIKorea,
“Yes Japan doesn’t own the Antarctic but neither do you or the rest of the eco-loons. If you don’t like the Japanese violating your so called “rights†then why should you expect the Japanese to have their same rights violated by you? ”
I think you misunderstood so let me explain it for you. I think the agreements are wrong.
The Japanese believe they have a right to grab resources in the Antarctic and obviously existing agreements allow this. However, I believe I have a right to have the whales in the Antarctic left undisturbed and so I think the agreements are wrong and outdated. More and more people think this way. Why should this “right to take” trump all other rights. The disaster befalling our oceans right now calls in to question the existing agreements. Marathon voyages 1000s of kms around the globe to grab resources are absurd in this day and age.
“Your greenhouse gas comment is humorous when compared to the amount of greenhouse emissions that come from cattle grazing in Australia. ”
I am opposed to industrial scale cattle farming, so what’s your point? What is humorous is your high-school debating technique.
I notice you made no comments about how unacceptable it is for Japan to impose its culture and values on the Antarctic. That’s no doubt because even you can’t bring yourself to defend it.
5:31 am on December 29th, 2007 19
Culture and values on the Antarctic? What the hell does that even mean? No one even lives where they hunt whales. You may not like industrial cattle farming but what are you doing to stop it compared to saving the whales? Nothing.
Just admit it the whale issue has nothing to do with the environment or conservation and everything to do with your feelings.
5:50 am on December 29th, 2007 20
[...] Beer. The owner of Blue Tongue Beer, John Singleton just happens to be a big supporter of the eco-loon group the Sea Sheppard Society who makes it a yearly mission to attack the Japanese whalers by ramming [...]
2:48 am on December 31st, 2007 21
I think you need to read more about what the Japanese themselves are saying about whaling. The need to continue whaling is always linked to their “food culture” so let’s take them up on what they are saying… since when did their food culture extend all the way to the Antarctic!?
Have a look at this link to get an idea of the opnions of Japanese pro-whalers. Some of these articles are hilarious…
http://www.whaling.jp/english/isana.html
You’ll never find a bunch of middle-aged men with bigger chips on their shoulders… and you’re defending these people!!
Your “what are you doing to stop it?” comment again reminds me of the debates in high school. You could make that comment to anybody in any debate, so… err… we can’t debate anything, right?
Pathetic.
The Japanese whale issue, for me, is connected with the double standards of the Japanese. On the one hand they solemnly harp on about their “local traditional food culture” but on the other hand they send a fleet of high-tech ships to the far-corners of the globe to grab the resources for it. Anyone can see the dichotomy there.
If they want to protect a local traditional food culture (as they put it) they’d do better to take the whales locally.
These marathon voyages are absurd in this day and age and are making Japan look like a bunch of 18th century loonies.
7:44 am on December 31st, 2007 22
There are Japanese fish all across the world because they have to feed 128 million people. Australia has an entire continent to feed 21 million people.
You bring up double standards in regards to Japan but ignore your own.
To review my main points which it seems people are having a hard time disputing:
- This is not an environmental issue, this is not a conservation issue, and this is not a territorial issue as the whale advocates claim.
- This is a dispute based on feelings.
- The Japanese want to commercially whale like other nations but want to do it through an international agreement.
- The tactics of the anti-whale people are only making the situation worse.
- If the anti-whale nations negotiated in good faith with the Japanese I’m willing to bet an agreement on Antarctic whaling could be reached.
- This issue is obscuring much larger real environmental issues that these same nations condemning Japan won’t deal with.
10:55 am on December 31st, 2007 23
I tend to agree with your points, which were not clear in your initial “Look at this racist Aussie video” and subsequent “Look at this interesting Japanese video” posts.
7:31 pm on December 31st, 2007 24
“This is not an environmental issue, this is not a conservation issue, and this is not a territorial issue as the whale advocates claim.”
Don’t be ridiculous. Any dispute connected to ocean resources involves all these aspects.
“This is a dispute based on feelings.”
Yeah, right! Japan’s feelings that in order to protect a “local traditional food culture” they have to send a big fleet of high-tech ships to the Antarctic! I really would love to know how on earth they think their food culture can extend to the furthest reaches of the globe!! They apply all this “local traditional food culture” crap to the dish on the table but not to the means of getting it there. As I said, these Victorian-era style journeys halfway around the globe to grab resources look completely ludicrous in this day and age.
As I also said, why should their assumed “right-to-take” trump everything?! Increasing numbers of people feel they have a “right-to have-the-whales-left-in-peace” in the Antarctic. This dispute (from my point of view) IS based on feelings to the extent that I feel that I have this right. Therefore the agreements that allow the current situation are, for me, completely wrong and should be revised.
However, I’m a reasonable person. I think Japan should be allowed to catch whales, but only in its coastal or near-coastal waters. That would also fit in much better with its oh-so-important “local traditional food culture”.
“The tactics of the anti-whale people are only making the situation worse.”
The tactics of the Japanese are making the situation worse… they could take all their whales near Japan and that would, I believe, shut up all except the most extreme whale huggers. It would shut me up, for the reasons I have given above.
“If the anti-whale nations negotiated in good faith with the Japanese I’m willing to bet an agreement on Antarctic whaling could be reached.”
Japan’s whaling policy has been hijacked by a group of rabid pro-whaling nutters who see this as matter of national pride.
Have a look again at the link I gave above to see how they really think:
http://www.whaling.jp/english/isana.html
The things they come out with are hilarious!!
However, they are blind to how ridiculous it looks for this national pride to be stretched all the way to include the Antarctic.
The real problem is these stubborn middle-aged Japanese men… and make sure they are all men, and all middle-aged. No women or young people’s views are reflected in Japan’s whaling policy.
“This issue is obscuring much larger real environmental issues that these same nations condemning Japan won’t deal with.”
It’s not. I was at the Eco-Products Fair in Tokyo earlier in December and saw plenty of evidence of all kinds of “large and real” environmental issues being addressed, both by Japan and other countries. Pretty inspiring, actually.
9:48 pm on December 31st, 2007 25
Aguyinjapan = A Korean in Japan.
2:35 pm on January 16th, 2008 26
[...] environmental conservation issue I will direct them to this quote from Flannery even though I have repeatedly linked to whale populations compared to the numbers hunted as evidence. So since it is not a territorial [...]
12:13 pm on January 31st, 2008 27