Menu
IWC – Final Thoughts
Commissioners and support staff of the 67 nations represented at the 66th Meeting of the International Whaling Commission, members of the IWC Secretariat, observers from Intergovernmental Organizations and Non-governmental Organizations and members of the media have all gone home or are enjoying some time off after an intensive period of hard work. The rhetoric was very polite and often formal; most speakers thanked their nemesis for their comments before vehemently disagreeing with them. The range of opinions and positions on the floor ran the gamut from staunch whaling nations to absolute conservation minded ones, with every position in between represented. The NGOs also represented a wide variety of points of view, from Humane Society International, World Wildlife Fund and Animal Welfare Society, to organizations like the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission, Japan Whaling Association and Makah Indian Tribe. The South Atlantic Whale Sanctuary was not adopted at this session, but that does not mean that the fight is over. This proposal was first brought up in 1998 and has reached the floor multiple times since 2001; the sponsoring nations (Argentina, Brazil, Gabon, South Africa and Uruguay) are certain to bring it up again at the next meeting. And the NGO community is determined to make sure it passes this time. The key is going to be swaying the votes of a large group of small nations, mainly from the Caribbean and South Pacific, they always align with Japan. There is ample evidence that this is due in large part to fisheries aid to the countries and stipends to commissioners attending the IWC meetings. Often these countries are represented at the IWC by fisheries managers and the governments, and citizens back home are not even aware of the way their countries are represented. European Union diplomats will have to contact their counterparts to point out that financial aid from Europe in most cases is far greater than any contributions from Japan, although those funds are not tied to any quid pro quo. Also, the governments of the nations on question need to be made aware of how they are being represented. And finally, travelers from all over the world should be encouraged to spend their vacation budgets in countries that do not promote whaling. Seven resolutions were introduced at this meeting. The one that clearly spoke most strongly to the conservation community was the Draft Resolution on the Critically Endangered Vaquita, which passed by consensus. In practical terms, this resolution puts pressure on the government of Mexico to do all it can to prevent the extinction of the tiny Sea of Cortez porpoise. This makes the IWC the third international body to take a position on the issue after the World Conservation Congress and the International Union Conservation of nature passed similar resolutions in recent weeks. Whaling does not rank among the top conservation issues affecting cetaceans in most people’s minds, but it takes constant vigilance and action to keep it from expanding again. Additionally, the International Whaling Commission has become an important player in the areas of research and conservation. As concerned citizens, we need to keep a close eye on the IWC, even between meetings, to both make sure that commercial whaling is not resurrected and to keep informed on all the work being done in so many areas of cetacean management. ACS Representative, Bernardo Alps
1 Comment
Brazil will host IWC67 in 2018. The next meeting of the IWC Scientific Committee will be held in Bled, Slovenia, in May of next year and in Kenya in 2018. Participants can look forward to some truly beautiful places.
Japanese Commissioner Joji Morishita will be the Chair of the next meeting. He has a lot of experience in the IWC and is a skillful diplomat. Morishita was officially nominated by the United States. Most of the day was spent working on finance and administration details, formally accepting committee reports that have been presented throughout the week, and ironing out the wording of the of the Summary of Main Outcomes. Like all documents pertaining to this meeting, it can be found on the IWC website (6360), https://archive.iwc.int/pages/search.php?search=%21collection24471&k= The final pending resolution, the Resolution on the Creation of a Fund to Strengthen the Capacity of Governments of Limited Means to Participate in the Work of the IWC, passed with 30 yay votes, 31 abstentions and one non-participation. The reason for the many abstentions is that the European Union was unable to reach a position on the resolution. A whale tie contest offered a welcome break from a week of hard work. Japan’s Hideki Moronuki narrowly defeated Ryan Wulff of the United States. The Draft Resolution on the Critically Endangered Vaquita was approved by consensus, well, kind of. No nation wants to appear unsympathetic to the plight of a species that is so close to extinction, but many countries vehemently espouse the belief that the IWC has no jurisdiction over small cetaceans. In the end, no country spoke against the resolution, which would have automatically blocked approval by consensus, but many countries went on record as not being part of the proceedings (akin to abstaining during a vote). The resolution was introduced by the US with 20 co-sponsors, all of them European nations. The commissioner from Mexico welcomed the resolution.
It commends the Mexican government for efforts already in place to protect the vaquita and for the announcement of a permanent gillnet ban in the species’ habitat, and urges it to eliminate all exceptions to the ban. This refers specifically to the corvina fishery which doesn’t by itself endanger the vaquita but can be used as cover for the highly lucrative illegal totoaba fishery. It also urges all governments to help enforce trade and trafficking in totoaba swim bladders and to offer assistance to Mexico. The full text of the resolution (Resource ID 6315) can be found at https://archive.iwc.int/pages/search.php?search=%21collection24471&k= The Resolution on Enhancing the Effectiveness of the IWC also achieved consensus and independent review will be conducted before the next meeting. The Resolution on Food Security will be worked on further and will likely be taken up again at the next meeting. Three resolutions that failed to garner consensus passed with a simple majority of votes: the Resolution on Improving the Review Process for Whaling under Special Permit (34/17/10) basically calls for “scientific whaling” programs to undergo an approval process rather than just being authorized in house by the countries conducting them; the Resolution on Cetaceans and Ecosystem Services (35/16/9) acknowledges the important role that cetaceans play in the environment; and the Draft Resolution on Minamata Convention (36/23) addresses mercury and heavy metal pollution. The resolution on aid to governments with limited means will be revisited on Friday. On the topic of Safety at Sea, Japan offered a PowerPoint presentation that detailed the encounters its whaling fleet has had with protest vessels in the Southern Ocean. All speakers agreed that safety should be a primary concern and some suggested the International Maritime Organization as the appropriate forum for this discussion. Special Permit (or scientific) Whaling was discussed at length, with comments falling along the expected lines. The US reiterated that lethal research is unnecessary while Japan defended the practice. India suggested the research could be conducted on captive animals. We heard updates on three existing Conservation Management Plans; for western North Pacific gray whales, south western Atlantic and south eastern Pacific southern right whales. Regarding the gray whales, the Scientific Committee has received recording from the US Navy that show the presence of this species in the East China Sea. Mexico and Korea have formally signed on to the CMP. It was also announced that the IWC Whale Watching Handbook should be online by 2018. ACS Representative, Bernardo Alps IWC – Day Three
This question asked on Facebook by Lili Hartounian-McSkimming is typical of that I have heard quite a bit over the past few days from people not present at the IWC meeting: “Have they discussed whaling?” The answer is an unequivocal “Yes.” The whaling nations want it made clear that the focus of the IWC should be about whaling and slip the topic into their comments consistently. Many like-minded nations have mandates from their constituencies and requests from environmental groups to specifically oppose whaling and related issues and also make sure it is mentioned. So, no matter what the specific topic being discussed, whaling is almost always part of it. Additionally, the issue of the stalemate over commercial whaling in the IWC was specifically addressed by Japan. The debate will continue on Thursday. Most of the day was spent on committee reports, many of which highlight the positive work with cetacean management and protection, which is becoming a bigger and bigger part of the work of the IWC. Cetacean Health and Disease, Anthropogenic Sound, Bycatch, Ship Strike, and Marine Debris were some of the issues discussed. Special attention was given to the success of the Global Whale Entanglement Response Network which has trained over 700 responders worldwide since its adoption in 2012. A Stranding Response effort will be the next step. Immediately following the plenary, Switzerland hosted a champagne reception to introduce artist Eric Alibert whose striking Sentinel series whale paintings adorn the venue of the meeting. ACS Representative, Bernardo Alps Day Two of the biennial meeting of the International Whaling Commission quickly got off to a disappointing start for the conservation community; the proposed South Atlantic Whale Sanctuary failed to be approved. The establishment of the sanctuary would have required a change to the charter of the IWC, and therefore would have needed a ¾ majority to pass. The proposal ended up with 38 yeas and 24 nays, along the expected “party lines.” Interestingly, Grenada and St. Vincent & The Grenadines abstained rather than voting against the proposal with the block of whaling countries. No whale will be killed as the result of this inaction; but it would have been a great step towards further curtailing commercial whaling and it would have meant a lot to Brazil, a country that is firmly establishing itself as a leader among the like-minded group of nations at the IWC.
Additionally, five resolutions were brought up for initial discussion today; none achieved a consensus meaning all seven resolutions (two were presented yesterday) are still open and will be acted on in the next couple of days. They Include the Draft Resolution on Food Security which prompts the IWC to take into account peoples’ right to an adequate food supply when making decisions; the Draft Resolution on the Creation of a Fund to Strengthen the Capacity of Governments of Limited Means to Participate in the Work of the IWC which calls for voluntary contributions to pay the dues of poor countries; the Draft Resolution on Cetaceans and Their Contributions to Ecosystem Functioning which acknowledges the important role that whales play in the environment; and the Draft Resolution on Minamata Convention, looks at the effects of mercury and other pollutants on human and cetacean health. Of special interest is the Draft Resolution on the Critically Endangered Vaquita. This resolution was submitted by the US and makes specific recommendations to the Government of Mexico to prevent the extinction of the critically endangered vaquita, including expansion and stronger enforcement of the gillnet ban currently in place. There is a strong sentiment held by many IWC member nations that this body should only address issues facing large whale species, but this resolution garnered strong support despite addressing a “small cetacean.” Japan and the Russian Federation offered to abstain in order to not stand in the way of a possible consensus. A long time was spent on the progress report of the Resolution on Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling passed in 2014, which seeks to establish criteria for dealing with this issue. It is particularly important because the US is one of four nations with recognized native subsistence hunts (Greenland, Russia and St. Vincent & The Grenadines are the others) and the quotas are up for renewal in 2018. In the past, pro-whaling nations have used this issue as leverage to advance their agendas. Having clear guidelines in place will go a long way towards avoiding political maneuvering in the future. The full text of all resolutions can be found on the IWC website, https://iwc.int/day-two-at-the-iwc The day ended with a reception hosted by the NGOs present at the meeting. It was a fund event and well attended, although most whaling nation representatives were no-shows. ACS Representative, Bernardo Alps The day started out early with an 8 a.m. meeting of United States-based NGOs (of which ACS is one) with the US delegation. The meeting gave the commissioner and his team an opportunity to hear the concerns and advice from the various groups represented at the meeting, and to give a brief overview of the US position. Then everyone headed upstairs for the 10 a.m. Plenary Session kick-off.
As an observer, we sit in the very comfortable auditorium portion of the room. The delegations, most of which range in size from one to three people but can be as large as the fourteen-member US Delegation and the even larger Japan Delegation, sit classroom style facing the same way we do. That means that we see the backs of everyone’s head. The Chair sits on a raised podium facing us all. Anyone wishing to give a report or make an intervention (speak) is acknowledged by the Chair and then video of the speaker is projected on three large screens in the front of the room. Sometimes the camera has an unobstructed view of the person speaking and sometimes he or she is completely obscured by other bodies. Names are not used; all speakers are referred to and addressed by the name of the country they represent or their title within the commission. If you want to keep score at home, all documents that are available to the participants of the meeting can be downloaded from the IWC website, https://iwc.int/index.php?cID=28&cType=event . If you would like a postcard from the breathtaking Adriatic coast, send me an email at [email protected] within 48 hours of this blog post going live. Like the juggernaut that it is, the plenary was slow to gain momentum. Sixty-six countries have voting rights; a number more might get reinstated if they settle their dues balances. Brief technical issues with the translation services were quickly resolved. After warm welcomes by national and local dignitaries, the Agenda was adopted, followed by reports from the chairs of the Scientific Committee and of the Conservation Committee. After lunch, Brazil presented a Proposal for a Schedule Amendment to Create a South Atlantic Whale Sanctuary, co-sponsored by Argentina, Gabon, South Africa and Uruguay. The proposal will be voted on Tuesday, but the battle lines were clearly drawn during the comments that followed the announcement, with India, Mexico, US, Netherlands, Chile, Spain, Australia, Monaco and the NGO community offering strong support; while Japan, Iceland, Guinea, Russian Federation and Antigua-Barbuda voicing their opposition (Korea spoke also but it was not clear where it stands). The five countries proposing this schedule amendment represent the totality of IWC member nations in the area affected and did their homework by working with the Scientific and Conservation Committees. Before adjournment, two out of seven proposed resolutions were introduced. The first is a Draft Resolution on Enhancing the Effectiveness of the International Whaling Commission and calls for a “comprehensive, independent review of the Commissions institutional and governance arrangements,” sponsored by Australia, New Zealand and the US. The second, a Draft Resolution on Improving the Review Process for Whaling under Special Permit, is an attempt to bring scientific whaling under the review of the Scientific Committee rather than leaving it up to the individual countries (at present Japan issues itself all permits for its scientific whaling), was sponsored by Australia and New Zealand. The remaining five draft resolutions will be introduced Tuesday, including one on the critically endangered Vaquita. My totally random seat selection for the fun and delicious dinner hosted by Slovenia rewarded me with a seat next to IWC Head of Science Greg Donovan. He has to be the Most Interesting Man in the World for someone interested in marine mammal research and conservation like myself. ACS Representative, Bernardo Alps As hundreds of children deftly sailed their tiny sabots just offshore and delegates from around the world continued to pick up their ID badges for IWC66, representatives of the many NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) held a strategy meeting to coordinate efforts and share information. A large number of groups from every corner of the globe are represented at the meeting, and will play an even more important role beginning with this meeting, as observers are allowed to intervene (publicly comment) and agenda items beginning with this year’s meeting. An informal tally reveled that participants in today’s International NGO Meeting brought a combined total of 557 years of experience in the arena of IWC meetings. But the amount of institutional knowledge brought to the table by this group of observers is tremendous and an important contribution to the overall achievements of the IWC. I personally was not able to add much to the impressive total of 557 years as this is my first time attending an IWC meeting, although ACS has been represented here for decades. I have been following the amazing work of many of my colleagues for years, several of which have been speakers at past ACS conferences. I am looking forward to the beginning of the Commission Meeting tomorrow. ACS Representative, Bernardo Alps All other things beings equal, I prefer not to be only two days into a diagnosis of pneumonia when I fly to another continent. But this time it can’t be helped.
I expect Portorož, Slovenia, to be amazing. Having worked and lived in San Pedro for the last two and a half decades, I have heard countless tales about the beauty of the Adriatic Coast. I will represent the American Cetacean Society at the 66th meeting of the International Whaling Commission. It is important to understand from the beginning what the IWC is and what it is not. The IWC is not a conservation organization; it is a political body and its meetings are pure politics. Half its member nations are here in pursuit and support of a single goal: the resumption of organized commercial whaling. The other half are on a mission on behalf of concerned citizens to hold the line for animal rights. There are no sanctions at stake other than public opinion. It will be a ballet of negotiations, concessions, tricks, ruses, maneuvers, stunts, cajoling, threats, and posturing. And, like with all politics, it is important that we the public keep a close eye on it. We need to let the delegations and their governments know that their citizens appreciate and stand behind their efforts. And we need to let the world know what happens here. I will be a shoestring lobbyist. I will be coordinating conservation strategy with a phalanx of like-minded conservation organizations, I will be cheering on the US and other delegations and will provide them with advice and feedback, I will be seen at the proceedings, and I will report back to you. Thank you for reading this. We can make a difference together, so won’t you please join me? ACS Representative, Bernardo Alps |
American Cetacean SocietyThe mission of the American Cetacean Society is to protect whales, dolphins, porpoises, and their habitats through public education, research grants, and conservation actions.
ACS Representative, Bernardo AlpsCategories |