Now, the former captain of the Ady Gill is being detained (video+story) on the exact same whaling ship after using a jet ski and cover of darkness to climb aboard and present the Japanese with a civilian arrest warrant and $2M dollar demand for damages.What a dipshit.
Chris Hitchens ----]
]--Mr Hitchens--]
Lebanese Nazis ----] ]
]--Hitchens--]
Sea Shepherd ------] ] ]
]--Whalers------] ]
Japanese Whalers --] ]
]--[ ARSEHOLE GRAND FINAL!!!]
Sarah Palin -------] ]
]--Mrs. Palin---] ]
Kanye -------------] ] ]
]--Youtube---]
Youtube commenters ] ]
]--Youtube------]
Camille Paglia ----]
And then the winner, drop trou', six with the flat side.The members of the IWC voted on 23 July 1982 to apply a moratorium to all commercial whaling beginning in the 1985-86 season. Since 1992, the IWC's Scientific Committee has requested that it be allowed to give quota proposals for some whale stocks, but this has so far been refused by the Plenary Committee. Norway continues to hunt minke whales commercially under IWC regulations, as it has lodged an official objection to the moratorium.See there? There has been an official UN moratorium on whaling since 1985. None allowed. There are some conditions under which whaling is supposed to be allowed with some quota restrictions, but no quota has ever been approved. Norway refused to join the International Whaling Commission, so technically they are allowed to whale as much as they like; still, while their whaling program is egregious, it's nowhere near the scale of Japan's.
When the commercial whaling moratorium was introduced by the IWC in 1982, Japan lodged an official objection. However, in response to US threats to cut Japan's fishing quota in US territorial waters under the terms of the Packwood-Magnuson Amendment, Japan withdrew its objection in 1987... Since Japan could not resume commercial whaling, it began whaling on a supposedly scientific-research basis.Do you see how this works? So Japan prints up a quota every year, saying "we are going to allow our whalers to take this many whales... oops, I mean we are going to allow our research vessels to study this many whales." And of course they fill that quota. The quota means nothing, as it's set in direct violation of treaties which Japan signed. But they keep setting them, against numerous UN objections.
So has the strategy of political and protest action succeeded? Is the fact that Japan now subsidies its whaling industry as a matter of principle a success? Is the fact that Norway continues to take hundreds of whales commercially a success? Is the fact that Canada told the anti-whaling movement to get stuffed and does it anyway a success? Is the fact that even anti-whaling countries still whale a success?posted by FuManchu at 8:00 PM on March 8, 2010
After nearly thirty years, it’s become increasingly obvious that the strategy of being a hardline, anti-whaling country fails the most basic litmus test. It’s not working to end whaling- it is a bad strategy that is failing.
...
There’s a very good reason why most countries gave up whaling. The economics don’t really work. Converting an economic issue to a matter of principle, doesn’t seem to help whales out a lot.
...
We are at a point where thousands of species are at much greater risk than minke whales. Yet the choice is to take those resources we have and put them into "stopping whaling". Trying to save a small set of species not actually threatened by whaling, and giving up on so many more species that are in more urgent need, isn’t the optimal approach. And the fact that this strategy to stop whaling has not succeeded in 30 years feels like a colossal waste of money.
« Older At first I thought it was a teaparty rap, but no, ... | The Ward Warren Film.... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 10:31 PM on February 15, 2010 [13 favorites]