by Michael dEstries
Categories: Animals.
Photo: Flickr/Creative Commons

For those hoping this year’s whaling talks in Morocco might lead to greater conservation of the giant mammals, prepare to keep waiting.

Behind closed doors, delegates of the commission’s 88 member governments failed to reach an agreement on the proposed “Peace Plan”; a compromise that would have lifted a 24-year ban on commercial whaling and allowed Japan, Norway and Iceland to resume commercial hunting under tight quotas and international monitoring.

Not surprisingly, Japan was hit with much of the blame for causing discussions to grind to a halt. The main sticking point apparently was a sharp curtail in hunting in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary. According to the NY Times, delegates said that Japan and antiwhaling nations could not reach agreement on the size of the catch and that Tokyo had balked at agreeing to eventually phase out the hunt altogether.

Personally, I don’t think anyone should be surprised by that last reaction.

Most encouraging perhaps, is that many anti-whaling nations refused to consider a deal that would end the moratorium.

“I am very pleased that this morning it’s now clear and confirmed that the commission won’t be … opening up the prospect of commercial whaling in the future,” said Australian Environment Minister Peter Garrett.

So what does all this mean? Well, unfortunately, business as usual for Japan and Co. in hunting under banners of “scientific” BS. And a one year tabling of the discussion till everyone meets again to see if there’s wiggle room for a compromise. Just don’t hold your breath on the latter.

About Michael dEstries

Michael has been blogging since 2005 on issues such as sustainability, renewable energy, philanthropy, and healthy living. He regularly contributes to a slew of publications, as well as consulting with companies looking to make an impact using the web and social media. He lives in Ithaca, NY with his family on an apple farm.

View all posts by Michael dEstries →
  • Chris Butler-Stroud

    Yes, thankfully the conservation countries rallied (minus the US and New Zealand) and rejected the compromise criteria.

    It was always a bad deal for whales and would have legitimized commercial whaling for many years into the future.

    The battle is about principle as much as numbers. The moratorium was a huge victory for conservation and progressive thinking in our relationship with these remarkable creatures with which we share the planet. This deal would have destroyed it

    Whilst we oppose their whaling, better that we have a few more years of rogue whaling by Japan, Norway and Iceland, all of whose whaling is subsidized and suffering low and diminishing domestic demand, – rather than opening Pandora’s box to the resumption of potentially profitable commercial whaling.

    Chris Butler-Stroud
    Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society

  • Cho cho ma

    You can only buy so many votes.

    • David

      You do realize it never even came up for a vote?

      • georgina0912

        Does it matter? The point is that Japan and the other two whaling countries did not get away with legally whaling.

      • Kimitake Hiraoka

        But they’re legally whaling as it is… dumb dumb :)

      • georgina0912

        Riiiiight, because they are doing some very important research that is advancing humanity, or was it fattening their wallets….i can’t remember…dumb dumb…

    • David

      Sorry georgina, it means that Japan, Iceland and Norway get to continue their legal whaling exactly as they have for years. Meaning they set their own quotas.

      Sounds to me like they got their way and the whales lose.

      • Cho cho ma

        Either way there was going to be both positive and negative results regardless if the compromise had been passed or not.

      • georgina0912

        I get that, i never said that they would stop whaling. All this does it allow those three countries to continue business-as-usual and in a year they will get together and try to decide about lifting the whale moratorium.

  • Cho cho ma

    Ya, but they did not have enough votes to go that far because they knew they would lose.

    • David

      The Japanese don’t decide what the IWC will or won’t vote on. So the number of votes either side had wasn’t the issue. The issue was that the two sides could draft a compromise proposal to even consider voting.

  • Whitefish

    Now we start the boycotts…

    • David

      Are the Sea Shepherds going to join this boycott? Or are they going to continue to buy equipment, or try and buy equipment, from Japan?

  • Cho cho ma

    Why are you bringing up Sea Shepherd?

    • David

      Well let’s see. Some one mentions boycotting Japan. Sea Shepherd is know for calling for boycotts of Japan over whaling. And Sea Shepherd is hypocritical because while calling for boycotts they buy Japanese electronics.

      Does that answer you question?

      • Cho cho ma

        Could you give an example of when Sea Shepherd called for one?

      • Erik

        yo dumbf*ck
        try looking up Canadian Olympics boycott… or Canadian seafood boycott, boycott Iceland…boycott biodiversity conference…

        you’re nearly too stupid to be classified as homo sapien…

      • georgina0912

        Erik, why are you so bitchy all the time?

      • Cho cho ma

        I was talking about Japan!!!

        Ur the dumb one!!!



      • Erik

        georgina – it comes from dealing with scum, such as yourself, on a daily basis. Don.t like it ? don’t read it.

      • georgina0912

        Yikes, Eric/Bitchy is as Eric/Bitchy does…all that name calling and no class.

      • Erik

        you know how to deal with it bitch… skip the parts you don’t like.. same as you do with laws and regulations you don’t like.
        got any more, skank?

      • Kimitake Hiraoka

        Come come Erik-san, leave the belligerence to the anti-whaling fanatics.

        There’s no need for abuse when you’ve got science, reason, logic and morality on your side.

      • georgina0912

        Kimi, this is the first time i agree with your thinking. Reason, morality, and science shall prevail!

      • From MN, with hope…

        They explained in their latest press release that they don’t blame specific companies for the governments support of whaling. They call for the boycott of certain meetings because of the ways the Japanese government has ruined them for their own gain. Plus, think about it, if they were to actually boycott Japanese products, and tell everyone to boycott them, than all you pro-whalers would be whining about how they’re blaming companies that don’t have anything to do with whaling. Admit it, it’s anything to try make them try look bad.

  • Whitefish

    Japan, Iceland and Norway will continue to be rogue states and will continue to subvert CITES. Nice…

    • David

      Maybe you should read CITES. Then you would know that Japan, Iceland and Norway follow their obligations under CITES.

  • Ecocht Wills

    The notion that these magnificent mammals should be cruelly shot and killed by barbaric, bomb-tipped exploding harpoons is being rejected by more and more people. Let barbarity recede into history. Not to mention,
    Japan’s whaling-pushers have earned the monumental distrust of the world, plain and simple.

    Poor David, must be crushing puppy and kitten heads out of frustration!

    • Erik

      eunuch willis,
      are you truly brain dead, or just acting the part?
      You seem to relish the thought of crushing animal heads…

      Uncompromising idiots, such as those you seem to represent, have probably destroyed the only chance regulated whaling may have had. I would tend to think that now, since the IWC has been neutralized as a tool for sustainable whaling, the whaling nations will withdraw and form their own league. One of the first things being written into their rules is the non-admittance of non-whaling nations. This alone will prevent the hijacking that happened this round. Go ahead, start your boycotts, start your protests, YOU have caused the breakdown of the governing agency in place, it has done nothing more than that.

      • From MN, with hope…

        Again, the IWC is voluntary. Still, even it would have come to a vote, than it wouldn’t matter. Japan has bought votes. Japan will actually probably leave the IWC since they said before the meeting ‘We want to recommence commercial whaling, or we will leave the commission.’ Not exactly in those words, but you get the point. They wouldn’t bother to form their own league to set quotas, they could just kill as they wish. Mind you, Iceland is in a bit of a pickle. They (I think need, but don’t take my word on it) to join the EU, but Germany has said that they will stop whaling, or no admittance. GREAT economic union, or whaling. I’m sorry, but that scale is tipped so far to the EU and end of whaling, that it would be smarter to try and play Superman by jumping off a building before they say ‘No thanks, we’d rather kill whales.’ Now if they don’t, than that’s their decision that will follow the IWC regulations if they try and play it off by some other type of whaling like Japan does.

      • David

        Germany made a political statement. They aren’t the whole EU, so until a majority of the EU say the same thing it doesn’t matter.

        Great economic union? Really? Have you heard of Greece and their massive economic problems that is costing all the EU huge amounts to prop up? And that is just one. There are others with similar problems and a number of Eastern European countries that are looking to join who have their own economic woes.

      • From MN, with hope…

        The EU has huge economic potential for any country. Sure, it’s the four PIGS countries, but prior to the economic turmoil than it was a brilliant thing, and allowed citizens of the EU to travel about the countries freely. Sounds pretty good for the people as well. Sure, Germany isn’t the whole EU, but they are the best economy in the EU. I am sure that anti-whaling France would be willing to join Germany, and others as well.

  • Kimitake Hiraoka

    Well I suppose for you guys the upside of all this is that Sea Shepherd has another year of fund raising antics down in the Southern Ocean. Sure, more whales are going to cop it but the ratings and dollars are what comes first.

    Who knows, perhaps this will be the year Sea Shepherd finally kills someone? It’s so exciting!

    • georgina0912

      Oh yes…let’s kill somebody!! Exciting right Kimitake? Probably just as exciting it is to you to kill whales.

      Now, the “upside” as you call it, will be the day when SSCS does not have a job to do because nobody is whaling or poaching.

      • Erik

        you stupid witch, your support of TERRORISTS and TERRORISM as a tool is exactly the same thought processes of every other maggot in this world. Your sole guiding thought is to have YOUR thoughts and ideals prevail, no matter how.
        Typical scum, you are the lowest form of vermin in the barrel.

      • AnimuX

        Once again we see pro-whalers attacking the character of those who oppose whaling in the Ecorazzi comments.

        The ideological bias is evident in the ongoing campaign to demonize environmental activists. For example, they compare activists who have never killed a human being to terrorists who regularly and violently take the lives of innocent people. This false comparison is purely intended to evoke a negative emotional response.

        It is especially distasteful when you consider the reality of environmental activism which has seen in its history the demise of many activists at the hands of their ideological opposites.

        People like Dian Fossey, murdered by gorilla poachers for interfering with their illegal activities, and Fernando Pereira, killed in an act of state sponsored terrorism when the Rainbow Warrior was sunk with explosives by French agents to prevent anti-nuclear protest. Indeed on many occasions activists have had their lives directly threatened, been beaten, assaulted with haikpiks, knives and gaffs, and in some cases killed. Yet the opponents of environmental activism call the activists, violent.

      • Cho cho ma

        Could you please define WHY Sea shepherd is a terrorist organization?

      • georgina0912

        Not falling for that Erik, not lowering myself to the same level as you with all that name calling. See, the problem with people like you is that you try to make people feel bad by calling them…hmmm, let’s see what you have called me: stupid witch, maggot, scum, vermin, and that just shows your level of maturity.

        One cannot have an intelligent conversation with people such as yourself. Also, note that i am not the only one in this blog who thinks (my) thinks thoughts and ideas prevail, the difference is that i do not need to offend anyone to do it.

        Karma is a bitch Eric…

      • Erik

        sure is skank … go back to your brain rotted veggie friends…
        the problem with YOU and your ilk is that you try to define those that do not think as you do as morally corrupt. You can only support your view by using emotions. Take your emotions and rotate on them for a bit…

  • Whoever…

    Again, there’s no point in arguing with these pro-whaling ‘people’ (paid bloggers, evil defenders, zombies, whatever you want to call them…) because they’re only interested in trashing people and creating an environment of hatred and thus pushing people away from this site.

    They use the same arguments over and over again, they don’t take into account anything we present or say, they lead us into playing their game – hatred, name calling, insulting, etc. – which I myself have already fallen into, and only create a sense of frustration and anger in those who are trying to fight for animal rights.

    They have no feelings whatsoever and they don’t care about human and non-human life. If we insult them they say we can’t present arguments (but they do it all the time and it’s fine because it’s them doing it), if we wish they would die – I confess I’ve done that before because I truly believe it’s because of people like them that the world is fucked up – they say we are terrorists and are evil (however they say it all the time wishing all activists would die painfully and also they hate, for some reason, veg*ans)…

    Therefore, it’s a complete waste of time and energy to engage with them because that’s what they truly want – to annoy us, upset us, drive us away from Ecorazzi and spread hatred!

    An ‘argument’ with them leads nowhere…

    Please ignore them because we will never change their minds (they are controlled and manipulated human zombies) and we are only playing their game!
    The best way to deal with these kind people is to ignore them, and believe me that that’s what really makes them furious and lose their masks. Give it a try and you’ll see for yourselves :)

    • georgina0912

      Long time no see! Glad to see you back :)
      I hear ya, i am done with “that” one, believe me. Hopefully one day all those will see things as they are and not as they have been fed to them. One can only hope, right?

      • Whoever…

        Hi, thanks :)

        Just ignore that bunch because they’re here only to provoke people that’s all.

        One thing is someone coming here to exchange ideas, another completely different is someone coming to Ecorazzi only to insult people and spread hatred.
        After engaging in an argument with them how do you feel? I for one feel upset, angry and frustrated because I’ve just wasted my precious time with them.

        Besides, doesn’t anyone else find it strange that these ‘people’ are always here replying to pretty much all of the comments other people make? I mean, if they aren’t paid bloggers or don’t belong to the whaling ‘industry’ then they’re just pathetic losers with too much time in their hands – where’s their income coming from if they don’t work?

        And that one who insulted you only proves they are lonely ‘little’ men who have probably never been with a woman, otherwise they wouldn’t be so disrespectful to women!

        Don’t play their game because you will lose… I ‘talk’ from experience.

        The day will come (sooner than people realize) when people will be forced to wake up and face the real truth – unfortunately, from what I see in the world, it will be too late to fix the mess we’ve made.

        However, and as a Native-American wisely said: the planet Earth has all the time in the world to regenerate itself, but we don’t and we are running out of time…

  • Mick

    The idea that Japan is primarily to blame for the failure of the talks at the IWC meeting is incorrect. They clearly made great efforts to compromise and reach an agreement.

    “The claim that Japan was to blame for failure in the talks – widely promulgated by environment groups – was dismissed by Sir Geoffrey Palmer, the former New Zealand Prime Minister who played a leading role in diplomacy here.

    “I was in the middle of this, and I think that’s absolutely false,” he said.”