Japan leads move to cut whaling by Artic natives
May 25, 2002 12:15 AM   Subscribe

Japan leads move to cut whaling by Artic natives [nytimes, reg. req.]. After being defeated in recent I.W.C. votes Japan wins one.
posted by rdr (11 comments total)
 
And the irony is that most Japanese couldn't care less about eating whale. It tastes like fat.
posted by dydecker at 2:04 AM on May 25, 2002


The point of such rules should not be "whales are big and cute and cuddly, or maybe it's just those big trusting eyes, how can we kill them?". The point should be "what level of hunting, native subsistence, commercial, or otherwise, will sustain the population?" If the quotas are too high than somebody is going to get screwed, and especially given that subsistence should take precedence over commercial use, although I'm not terribly worried about native communities in either Japan or the US. Really, though, it's hardly surprising that Japan would take this position.

Now, it may well be that this is a kind of pushback for other choices we've made, but I find it kind of amusing that we're acting "unilaterally" here but the usual suspects probably won't be making an issue of that.
posted by dhartung at 2:05 AM on May 25, 2002


dydecker has obviously never tasted a whale burger or whale beef. It's good! Intelligent food for intelligent people...
posted by dagny at 2:08 AM on May 25, 2002


dagny

dydecker has obviously never tasted a whale burger or whale beef. It's good! Intelligent food for intelligent people...


So chickens = stupid food for stupid people? Pigs = dirty food for dirty people? Monkfish = ugly food for ugly people? Sounds "controversial"...
posted by bifter at 3:46 AM on May 25, 2002


dhartung

Now, it may well be that this is a kind of pushback for other choices we've made, but I find it kind of amusing that we're acting "unilaterally" here but the usual suspects probably won't be making an issue of that.


No more amusing than that the usual suspects aren't backing US unilaterism whole-heartedly (cf: dagny in the post below you...)
posted by bifter at 3:48 AM on May 25, 2002


Objectivist meat: guaranteed offensive to every palate except that of other Objectivists. Happy cannibalism, dagny.
posted by riviera at 8:06 AM on May 25, 2002


I don't see how it's going to have much of an impact on the Eskimos or other artic aboriginal tribes. Ignoring the ruling is a Class AA misdemeanor...which is akin to jaywalking. Assess fines against the tribes? Sure, but what goods is that going to do? It's not like they can pay them.

Japan is throwing a hissy fit about their right to kill whales...what else is new?
posted by dejah420 at 12:16 PM on May 25, 2002


It's the problem with treaties and time. 110 years ago Native American tribes around the Columbia river were promised via treaty the right to harvest salmon 'forever'; due to dwindling stocks of fish this promise gets played with, which raises the question of the validity of treaties and whether an international treaty can or should superseed preexisting treaties of less than international scale. I would add that the treaty fish (subsistance/ceremonial) have always been illegially for sale at places like Cascade Locks, in direct contravention to the treaties.
posted by Mack Twain at 2:05 PM on May 25, 2002




Sea Shepherd on Japanese Whaling
posted by sheauga at 6:56 PM on May 26, 2002


US position on whaling - State Dept. Briefing, 5/24/02
posted by sheauga at 8:42 AM on May 27, 2002


« Older Cartoon Network   |   You'd be lucky to win a tenner! Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments