Slashdot Mirror
With Sales Down, Whale Meat Flogged As Source of Strength
beaverdownunder writes "From the Australian Broadcasting Corporation: 'Japan's peak whaling body has launched a new campaign to promote whale meat as a nutritious food that enhances physical strength and reduces fatigue. With about 5,000 tonnes of whale meat sitting unwanted in freezers around Japan, the country's Institute for Cetacean Research has decided to launch a new campaign to promote the by-product of its so-called scientific whaling program. Once popular in school lunches, younger generations of Japanese rarely, if ever, eat whale."
Not true. Both Japan and Iceland catch Fin Whales which are classified as 'Endangered'
... Leaving aside the AAT’s status under Australian domestic law, it can be noted that sovereignty over Antarctica is a sensitive international topic and only the United Kingdom, France, Norway and New Zealand officially recognise Australian sovereignty over the AAT. Japan does not recognise Australian sovereignty, along with the United States of America, China, and Russia. Japan also renounced all claims to Antarctica at the end of World War II.
Recognition, however, is not the test of sovereignty under international law. General recognition by other states of a state’s sovereignty over a particular territory no doubt assists a state in establishing sovereignty but it is not determinative. Under customary international law acquisition of sovereignty over territory that does not already belong to another state is established by effective occupation of the territory. While some authors argue “Antarctica is not subject to the ordinary legal regime of land territory, and rather than res nullius it is res communis” and, therefore, unable to support a claim of sovereignty, there is little support for this in the principles established by courts and other bodies exercising international jurisdiction. The decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice in the Legal Status of Eastern Greenland (1933) PCIJ Series A/B No 53 is particularly significant in relation to sovereignty over inhospitable, thinly populated polar territories such as Antarctica...
... If Australian sovereignty over the AAT is established under the principles of international law, even to a smaller geographic area than claimed by Australia, why do so few nations recognise this sovereignty? One answer is that the recognition of sovereignty is a political process, not merely legal. By refusing to recognise Australian sovereignty, Japan and other nations keep alive their ability to us e resources in the AAT. This ability is fettered only by the practical difficulties in operating in the hostile and remote Antarctic environment, and by the Antarctic Treaty System. This approach is contrary to The Rule of Law but explained by the realpolitik of international relations...
Do explain which international laws forbid whale hunting the way Japan practices it. It's a completely legal practice according to IWC.
Whaling for food is illegal. But Japan has come up with some bullshit excuse that they need to conduct scientific research which is why they need to kill whales, then selling the meat as byproduct just makes good sense.
The problem with this is that there is simply no need to kill so many whales for research it's just that Japan's (ruling) older generation view eating whale as such an essential part of their culture they refuse to contemplate change on this front. You might be able to make an argument that what Japan does it legal, but it is still against the spirit of the treaty.
I also think that the individual ships flout the law because they know their is no appetite to prosecute them back home. I certainly think that the average Japanese whaling ship captain will happily follow his prey into Australian waters then lie about it later if they Australian Navy is not around to stop them.
Finally, later this year or early next year the final word on whether what Japan does is legal or not will come down from the ICJ. That will be final and binding (no appeals allowed) but until then no one really knows either way.
I dont read
I'm thinking of converting my Hummer to run on whale oil.
According to this, contemporary sperm whale oil production peaked at almost 39 barrels/whale in 1952. At current US daily consumption of ~19 million barrels(and assuming that whale squeezin's are equivalent to inorganic oils), a mere ~488,000 whales per day could entirely eliminate our wasteful demand for oil!
That would exhaust the estimated pre-hunting wild population in about two days; but I'm sure that bold advances in aquaculture will step in to fill the gap.