Iceland's Whaling Draws International Rebuke
Posted March 11, 2011 in Reviving the World's Oceans, Saving Wildlife and Wild Places
Last week, diplomats from 11 nations delivered a demarche –a diplomatic letter of protest – to Iceland’s government over its escalation in commercial whaling. The U.S.-led joint demarche expressed “strong opposition to Iceland’s continuing and increased commercial harvest of whales” as well as its “recent international trade in whale products.” In particular, the countries are “deeply troubled” by Iceland’s harvest of endangered fin whales. The demarche notes how Iceland’s harvest and subsequent trade of fin whales does not “meet any market demand or need, and it undermines effective international whale conservation efforts.”
Commercial whaling has been banned by the International Whaling Commission since 1986. Despite the moratorium on commercial whaling, Iceland has increased its slaughter of minke and endangered fin whales in recent years. It killed 125 fin whales in 2009 and 148 fin whales in 2010. Fin whales are considered endangered, listed under both the U.S. Endangered Species Act and the IUCN Red List.
Unlike countries that rely on whale meat for subsistence purposes, Iceland has only a limited domestic market for minke whales and its people traditionally have not eaten fin whales. Instead, Iceland has increased its whaling hoping to find a profitable market in Japan – whose warehouses are already glutted with thousands of tons of excess whale meat from its own “scientific whaling” program.
The demarche is a positive step for the whales. It comes on the heels of a petition filed by NRDC and other groups with the Obama Administration to certify Iceland under the Pelly Amendment of the Fishermen’s Protective Act. (The Pelly Amendment allows the government to impose trade sanctions against another country for undermining conservation agreements. Click here to read additional details.)
Given Iceland’s escalation of commercial whaling and trade in whale products in violation of international law, now is the time for strong action. It is time to put pressure on Iceland’s illegal whaling industry by imposing trade sanctions. The Pelly petition identifies several Icelandic companies as potential targets for trade sanctions, including major seafood industry players that are directly tied to Iceland’s whaling industry.
We urge the Obama Administration to follow up its strong demarche and impose hard-hitting trade sanctions against Icelandic seafood companies directly tied to Iceland’s illegal whaling. Click here to send a message supporting sanctions.
Photo credit: NOAA
Comments are closed for this post.
Comments
Timothy Apwisch — Mar 11 2011 03:51 PM
Stop killing the whales NOW!!!!!
Kirsty Anderson — Mar 11 2011 04:41 PM
this is awful i always hate reading articles like this. the word 'glutted' makes me feel sick. it needs to stop.
mélody durand — Mar 11 2011 04:51 PM
it's horrible what's is happened to the whales !!!! this massacre must be stop quickly !!!
Cheryl Roth — Mar 11 2011 05:13 PM
Please stop all whaling activities.
Ekkehard vonFriedhof — Mar 11 2011 09:37 PM
This article makes no sense; if there is little demand and a glut of supply then Iceland would not be harvesting the whales (there would be no economic gain). I have visited Iceland, in addition to having native friends there and there are plenty of locals that eat whale contrary to what this article states. I tried it myself and it was quite good not at all what I was expecting. I still have trouble with the concept of people getting so bent out of shape over whaling of species that are endangered, such as the minke and fin whales. What about the poor sea bass or a cow?
Jean Paul Gouin — Mar 12 2011 03:23 PM
To Ekkehard vonFriedhof
You, sir, make no sense.
You say that "you still have trouble with the concept of people getting so bent out of shape over whaling of species that are ENDANGERED, such as the minke and fin whales. What about the poor sea bass or a cow?"
Is the cow endangered? Is the sea bass endangered.
Do they have brains comparable in complexity to humans ( Please google "cetacean neuroanatomy" before you say something stupid)
There has NEVER been any COMMERCIAL hunt of large wild mammals which ha proved to be sustainable on the long run.
I just spent a week in Iceland researching this issue.
The ultimate absurdity specific to Iceland is that the Ministry of Fisheries has authorized ALL the hunting of BOTH minke and fin whales in the waters right off the capital Reykjavik, the same place where a sustainable whale watching industry , the pride of Iceland, was growing steadily.
I dont give 5 years for the whaling to destroy that business .
The only reason some populations are now starting to recover is because of the moratorium, voted against the frantic opposition of all the whaling companies, and still ignored by 3 countries, Iceland, Japan and Norway.
Concerned Citizen — Mar 12 2011 07:20 PM
Few questions.
1. Why is the northen stock of Fin whales listed as "endangered" , didn't the IWC science committie agree on the stock size from one of the biggest scientific reserch ever done in the Northen Hemisphere and thus the sustainable hunting level? NOTE!, that the IWC choose not to listen to their own comittee, CITES is same and is thus probably based on emotional politics, thus not to be trusted.
2. Is the Southern stock of Fin whale and the Notrthen stock regarded as the same?
3. Why is it wrong to hunt a whale?
4. Does intelligence make you better than other animal life?
5. How do you define intelligence?
Best regards
A concerned citizen of the world.
Ekkehard von Friedhof — Mar 13 2011 11:33 PM
An unfortunate typo on my part leaving out the 'not' before endangered, which is supported well by Concerned Citizen's write-up. I believe you are driven more by emotion than facts as you have contradictions in your own statements. If Japan, Norway and Iceland have not stopped whaling and populations are still growing then it seems there is a sustainability level that is somewhere beyond the current hunts yield. I have studied 'cetacean neuroanatomy' but still do not quite understand the intelligence rational for your idealized food chain. In the end it comes down to economics, there would be no hunt if there was no demand and if the hunts are well managed then this is much better than the alternative. At first I did find it ironic that one go out on a whale watching tour only to return and walk 100 feet to eat what you just observed. However, after further contemplation it really isn't so odd. One can go to an aquarium or a zoo yet still enjoy many of these same animals on a plate later the same day. It's just a topic loaded with emotion and to some extent blind allegiance due to a lengthy propaganda campaign.