For the first time in over four decades a fleet of four ships sailed this morning from Japan with the intention of hunting and killing up to fifty humpback whales (among an estimated total of about a thousand whales). The stated purpose of the hunt is scientific research, but no one denies the fact that much of the whale meat caught during the mission will end up on the commercial market.
Humpback whales, whose habit of spending a lot of time near shore made them relatively easy to hunt, had dwindled to such a small number before the 1963 moratorium on hunting them was enacted that total extinction seemed quite possible. But they have been one of the environmental movement's success stories: from an estimated population of approximately 1200 in the 1960s the whales have made a modest recovery to a population of some thirty to forty thousand today. These whales have been relatively popular in the intervening decades: their complicated songs have been recorded, they've been monitored by amateurs and professionals alike, and they've been featured in works of fiction, including a recently published children's book and, perhaps most memorably, as an important plot point in Star Trek IV (which could almost have been subtitled The Revenge of Greenpeace).
Greenpeace, naturally, isn't being quietly acquiescent in this latest plan of the people of Japan to include humpbacks in their research (and on their dinner tables). But though Greenpeace claims that most of the Japanese people agree with their position on whaling, and neither have eaten, nor desire to eat, whale meat, some in Japan would disagree. For example, this program to reintroduce whale meat into the diets of Japanese schoolchildren specifically references the cultural importance of whale meat; similarly this document from Japan's Institute of Cetacean Research claims that the significance of whale meat to Japanese culture is still reflected in the number of whale meat dishes served during the ceremonies and festivals of the regions of Japan that once carried out a significant amount of whaling.
In many ways, "Save the Whales!" has been the iconic cry of the environmental movement, so this newest hunt targeting humpback whales can't help but be seen as a setback. But many in Japan insist that if they were permitted to resume commercial whaling, they would do so for cultural reasons, with the understanding of the importance of sustainable whaling practices, and with respect for the Earth and its gifts.
I suppose the question here for the crunchy conservative is whether it is better to protect the whales from any commercial use, or to permit very controlled amounts of hunting without any scientific pretense in order to aid the Japanese people in their desire to preserve an aspect of their culture, whether we agree with it or not?
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Dymphna on abortion:
"What stands out for me about the assignment is that I didn’t want to do it. Back then, in 1976, I knew what I thought: abortion was a “right” - why was I being made to tread that rutted track just to come up with the same old arguments? . . .
"That paper took months. It was back in the days before computers so I laboriously typed it out and kept a copy. Where it vanished in the several moves between then and now I have no idea. But I do remember being surprised by my conclusion, which I came to so reluctantly. Like Luther, I was stuck: in order to be true to my own ethical standards, I had to take a position that didn’t fit with my self-image as a feminist.
"As I remember, I spelled it out in my thesis on these grounds: since we have no idea when human life becomes actually “human” we would do better to err on the side of caution. Once all those millions of fetuses - if they are actually human beings - are gone; there is no bringing them back to life. And the harm done by our casual disposal of what turned out to be human life after all, accrues not to them but to us, those who are privileged and burdened with the responsibility of choice. . "
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2007/10/sometimes-you-just-have-to-hear-someone.html#readfurther
I agree with Dymphna on the issue of abortion, and I think the same argument applies here (and elsewhere). We simply do not know whether these creatures are self-aware or to what extent they are sentient. We make assumptions about such things because the alternative is really almost too horrible to imagine, but that's all it is - an assumption.
Would it really kill us to err consistently on the side of compassion -and caution - on issues of this kind?
I think most people's feelings about preserving endangered species has to do with the cuteness factor. I admit it's true for me, at least somewhat. Whales are cute (and even inspiring, look at the success of Whale Rider, a simultaneously Crunchy Con and Crunchy Lib movie if ever there was one).
Polar bears are adorable -- from a distance; obviously they're fierce and dangerous up close. But the adorable factor is why they have become the poster cub for those who believe in and want to try to do something about climate change.
(Side note: has anyone noticed how EVERY store in the universe is featuring polar bear merchandise for kids, even though most of them don't have a direct tie-in to The Golden Compass, the controversial children's movie we've discussed here on CC that both stars polar bears and advocates atheism? Rod **has** to write about that when he gets back ...)
I have a background in public relations. If someone said 40 or 30 years ago, as I might have, "Preserve the world's last dinosaurs, they're being hunted to extinction," there would have been an uproar in favor of it. I mean, living dinosaurs -- we have to keep them, right? They're the ultimate link to earth's past. (Unless you are fanatically anti-evolution in your beliefs, of course.)
And, indeed, alligators and crocodiles are that ultimate link. And the campaign to save them in the U.S., Australia and other countries succeeded anyway, without a catchy slogan. (I still like my idea, but Steve Irwin, rest his soul, managed to make the models for mythical dragons somewhat "cute" anyway.)
On the other hand ... on Sanibel Island in Florida (where the habitat allows alligators to grow to 13 or 14 feet), where several people have been killed in recent years -- and on any major body of water in Africa, where poor people must depend on the croc-infested rivers and lakes for washing clothes and potable water, and literally hundreds die every year -- people probably feel like they are living in Jurassic Park.
When the power was cut and the T-rexes and raptors came out for blood.
For all that, like the late and misnomered "Crocodile Hunter," I couldn't imagine living in a world without the leatherbags. (Their very nickname being indicative of an interesting example of "sustainability," as there are lots of crocodile "farms" around the world where crocs are raised and then killed for their skins.)
I also couldn't imagine living in a world without lions and tigers and other majestic man-eaters that, lacking reptilian scales, pass the cuteness test despite their ferocity.
As do polar bears, for that matter. Go figure.
Where's the Rainbow Warrior when you really need her? Damn! Scuttled by the French.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/18/AR2005061800890_pf.html
Some opinion polls show that younger generations of Japanese are more interested in conservation than culinary delights. The price for whale meat in Japan has decreased in recent years -- falling to $12 a pound in 2004 compared with $15 a pound in 1999. Demand for whale meat has been anemic. Last year, the industry put 20 percent of its 4,000-ton haul into frozen surplus.
So the government and pro-whaling groups have pumped cash into the promotion of eating whale meat. The government is spending about $5 million a year on such campaigns, while groups of housewives and other organizations are sponsoring whale cooking classes and related seminars to stimulate the market, according to officials and industry sources.
....
Pro-whalers in Japan contend that commercial whaling would popularize the meat by making it more affordable.
But they concede that they will first need to change the views of many younger Japanese, who now tend to see the animals as creatures in need of protection.
"Most young Japanese do not recall the years after World War II when we were hungry and the Americans wanted us to eat whale to survive," said Yuriko Shiraishi, 72, head of Women's Forum for Fish. "The whale saved us then, but thousands of years before that, Japanese were eating whale. Now, the Japanese don't want to eat whale because they don't know about it as a delicious and healthy source of protein. That's what needs to change."
The pro-whalers have taken aim largely at Japan's schools. Schools in western Wakayama Prefecture, which has long been a base of the whaling industry, this year began regularly serving whale meat for lunch. Dozens of schools nationwide will host whale seminars this year like the one at Takadate Elementary School in Natori, a suburb of the city of Sendai, about 280 miles north of Tokyo. At that school, children receive a scientific lecture on whales before enjoying a whale-meat snack. But if the parents and students here are any gauge, mass marketing of whale meat may yet be a hard sell.
"I think it's okay to have these small events so we can pass down our past whaling tradition to the children, but I am not in favor of restarting commercial whaling," said Tomoko Yanai, 45, who has two children. "The meat is delicious. I used to eat it when I was in school. But whales are precious animals and now I feel they should be protected."
I lived in Japan for a long time. Whaling is one of these nationalistic buttons that the hard-right knows it can use to get the populace going: "Why are they telling us what to eat?", etc. I even met people who thought that not eating whale was a Christian taboo, like Hindus not eating beef.
Basically, I don't have much sympathy with the J-nat view. Japan didn't have much of a whaling industry until the early 20th C; there was some small-scale whaling, but the Atlantic fringe of Europe has more of a claim to ancient whaling cultures.
Having said that, I'm not 100% sure of the case against whaling, especially if one eats other mammal meat. Actually, I don't eat meat (I do eat fish occasionally). Anyhow, even a full-blow PETA vegan is responsible for killing animals - just think of all the ground-nesting birds and small mammals killed when the wheat is harvested. I find it very hard to achieve consistency on this issue.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.