The Future of the World's Whales

Today, whales are hunted using sophisticated modern technology. After they're killed they're processed in huge factory trawlers.

Animal protection groups say that these rare animals are threatened with extinction. But defenders of the whale-hunt say the fifteen year old ban on commercial whaling has ensured that their populations have grown again. They want the ban lifted.

Two countries have been bypassing the international moratorium on whaling for years, Norway and Japan. The official Japanese line is they're carrying out research, obtaining laboratory samples.

They say only what's left is passed on for consumption, in accordance with international agreements. Just a smokescreen for cheating, as far as the environmentalists are concerned.

Anke Heublein is with Greenpeace: "Anything they wanted to know, they found out long ago. As far as their research is concerned, they've got all the information. Which means their whale fishing is plain illegal under the terms of the moratorium".

Norway uses another legal loophole and simply vetoes any ban. Last year, the Norwegian government set a quota of several hundred whales - a highly profitable business for the fishermen concerned.

By the mid 1980s, many species of whale were facing total extinction, and the mass killing only ended with the whaling ban.

But now, Klaus Barthelmess from the Whaling Research Project has called for the ban to be lifted, arguing there is no longer any question about the survival of the whales: "Everyone thinks the whales are dying out and it just isn't true.

"Most whale populations which haven't been hunted are recovering, although there are exceptions: for example blue whales in the southern hemisphere, or the right whales off the East coast of the Americas. But the other groups are recording significant population growth."

In any case, it's almost impossible to trace the origin of whalemeat. The expensive delicacy available on the Japanese market often comes from endangered species. People trying to protect whales think lifting the whaling ban would encourage a flourishing black market.

"Perhaps there could be spot checks," argues Anke Heublein of Greenpeace. "But even then, these checks would not show what types of whale had been caught, or how many of them. These are things you simply can't find out once a whale has been cut up and processed aboard a modern whaling vessel".

But there's one alternative source of income for would-be whalers: tourism, with whale-watching as the star attraction. More and more people are ready to pay for a close-up view of the world's largest mammals.

Whale History

Many different species of whales are facing extinction. In particular, the number of blue and hump-backed whales is falling sharply. That's why the International Whaling Commission announced a ban on hunting large whales in 1986. It had taken the commission long enough to take this step, but experts still believed the decision wasn't too late.

A hundred and fifty years ago, there were roughly quarter of a million blue whales. Now, there are probably no more than 3500. Blue whales, known for their haunting song, dropped over the same time from a hundred thousand to maybe 8000.

The drop in numbers began with the advent of large scale whaling using steam-driven vessels in the mid-19th century. Whale blubber was in great demand: it was cooked down to provide candle wax and oil for lamps and industrial processes. In particular, sperm oil was used in the manufacture of explosives, soap, shoe polish and cosmetics.

An estimated one and a half million whales disappeared into vast factory ships. They were usually slaughtered with harpoon charges which exploded inside the animals' bodies. The 1986 ban on whaling was supposed to put an end to all that.

The world's oceans are home to some 80 different species of whale. Every year, they cover thousands of kilometers between the polar regions and warmer waters in search of food and mates.

At the behest of some of its members, the International Whaling Commission set up two protected zones: one around the Antarctic and the other in the Indian Ocean. A third zone in the South Pacific is under discussion.

But even if all countries were to comply with the ban, whales would still be under threat. Experts estimate several hundred accidentally get caught in fishing nets every year.

Whales are also repeatedly washed up on Europe's coasts after apparently becoming lost. The cause of their disorientation could be environmental pollution, climate change, or even viral infection.

But some species have recently shown signs of recovery, and a number of countries are now calling for the introduction of quotas for them. That is bound to pitch hunters and protectionists into yet another virulent debate.

Should the Ban on Whaling be Lifted?

The main challenge at this week's IWC meeting comes from Iceland. Reykjavik obeyed the ban from 1986 to 1992 but then quit the IWC in protest. Last month, Iceland rejoined, hoping it will be able to convince other members to change the rules on whaling.

Iceland argues the moratorium can be ignored because its Minke whale population is strong enough to withstand hunting. The country also argues that the rising whale population is literally eating into its vital fish stocks.

Environmentalists and animal protection groups are afraid that if Iceland wins its case, mass commercial whaling will resume.

Earlier this month, Japan came under suspicion of having bribed smaller countries in the IWC to help it lift the whaling ban. New Zealand's Prime Minister Helen Clarke said Japan had been caught "red-handed".

She said the commission itself could be seriously undermined by Japan if vote-buying continued: "What will happen is that the Japanese will eventually get the numbers to bring back commercial whaling, at which point the commission will fall over."

New Zealand and Australia are pushing for a South Pacific whale sanctuary to be approved at the IWC annual meeting but hold out little hope.

Both countries were defeated at last year's IWC meeting after six Caribbean nations voted with Japan against the sanctuary. Needing a 75 percent majority, the sanctuary drew 62 percent support.