Technical Reports of the Ins�tute of Cetacean Research (2022)

pp. 56–58

CommentaryThe views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reﬂect the views of the Institute of Cetacean
ResearchSome thoughts about the Ins�tute of Cetacean Research
Gabriel Gómez Díaz
Institute of Cetacean Research, 4–5 Toyomi-cho, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104–0055, JapanA�er the establishment of the Interna�onal Whaling
Commission (IWC) moratorium on commercial whaling
and the following start of Japanʼs whale research programin the Antarc�c Ocean (the JARPA program), the Ins�tuteof Cetacean Research (ICR) became the focus of a�en�on
and repeated publicity stunts by protest extremist groups
reac�ng to the lethal component, one of many elements
forming part of the research program. Over the years,
that undeserved a�en�on mainly aimed to diminish theimportance and signiﬁcance of ICR research ac�vi�es, waso�en accompanied by seemingly endless hype directed
to an uninformed public and s�rred up in great part bywestern mainstream media. An o�en-seen cliché was theallega�on that, in spite of long years of research ac�vi�esin the Antarc�c, the ICR had only managed to produce asingle scien�ﬁc publica�on. Apparently, all that cri�cism
was just a ﬂank of a nefarious, systema�c and sustained
eﬀort deployed over the years by a huge variety of actors
to isolate and s�gma�ze Japan for its whaling policies, asexposed in detail in a paper �tled “International pressureand Japanese withdrawal from the International Whaling Commission: when shaming fails” (Kolmaš, 2020). In
fact, the ICRʼs research programs have produced a large
amount of scien�ﬁc informa�on required for conserva�on and management of large whales (see list of peerreviewed publica�ons in this issue).
Since the 2019 resump�on of commercial whaling
following its withdrawal from the Interna�onal Conven�on for the Regula�on of Whaling (ICRW), most of thatcacophony has subsided. For a brief �me soon a�er thisdecision was taken by the Government of Japan, the ICR
got a few calls and email queries from the general public
and the media wan�ng to know whether ICRʼs role andreason to exist had abruptly come to an end. Althoughsome pundits may disagree, the scien�ﬁc data produced
over the years through ICR research programs andJapanʼs contribu�on have been and con�nues to be ofparamount importance to part of the work and discussions of the IWC and other interna�onal organiza�ons.
Soon a�er Japanʼs expression of inten�on to withdraw
56

from the ICRW, the IWC unequivocally stated that ʻformany years Japan has played an ac�ve and integral rolein both the Commission and its Scien�ﬁc Commi�eeʼ(IWC, 2019). So, the answer to those queries is no, therole and mission of ICR presumably will con�nue as faras Japan remains commi�ed to the realiza�on of sustainable use of whale resources.
Japan withdrew from the ICRW in 2019 a�er careful considering that the IWC had walked away from its
original objec�ve of promo�ng sustainable use of whaleresources, namely maintaining a commercial whaling
moratorium without any scien�ﬁc jus�ﬁca�on. Enacted
in 1972, the U.S. Marine Mammal Protec�on Act (MPA),
ʻis celebra�ng this year 50 years of marine mammal science, conserva�on, and recoveryʼ (NOAA, 2022a). The
MPA was coincidentally created the same year when,according to mainstream media, a recommenda�onfor a 10-year moratorium on commercial whaling wasapproved overwhelmingly at the United Na�ons Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm (NewYork Times, 1972). Ten years later, the IWC decided that
there should be a pause (a zero-quota regula�on) in commercial hun�ng on all species and popula�ons of whales
from the 1985/1986 season onwards. This purportedly
temporary pause, which became to be known as the IWC
commercial whaling moratorium didnʼt last for 10 years
as originally intended, and, although it went remarkably
unno�ced by the media, in July 2022 a few an�-whaling
groups celebrated in Brighton, UK, its 40th anniversary.
Brighton was the venue of the 34th IWC Annual Mee�ng
where the principal stated goal of the United States wasto gain an indeﬁnite moratorium on commercial killing ofwhales.
This outcome was summarized as the conserva�onist
countries achieving an outstanding victory for whale protec�on, although they had yet to close the book on thehistory of commercial whaling (U.S. GPO, 1982). Another,less o�en quoted, major achievement by the UnitedStates at that mee�ng was the IWCʼs agreement to create
a new management scheme for aboriginal/subsistenceSome thoughts about the Institute of Cetacean Researchwhaling. This decision established a Technical Subcommi�ee to consider subsistence, nutri�onal and culturalrequirements of aboriginal peoples and advise the Commi�ee in much the same way as the Scien�ﬁc Commi�eedoes (U.S. GPO, 1982).
It is noteworthy that in spite of the 40-year-old moratorium, commercial whaling, an economic ac�vity not much
diﬀerent from other ﬁsheries, is now being conductedsustainably by two IWC member countries (Norway andIceland) and one ex-member country (Japan) (IWC, 2022).
Remarkably enough, consump�on for food of some 87
species of cetaceans and other marine mammals has
been reported in at least 114 countries (Robards andReeves, 2011), while the UN Organiza�on for Food andAgriculture (FAO) has yet to include marine mammals asa source of food in its sta�s�cs and reports (FAO, 2022).
Current sustainable whaling does not produce a nega�ve eﬀect on the exploited stocks. Meanwhile, due todiﬀerent causes other than whaling, at present two iconic
cetacean species, the North Atlan�c right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) (NOAA, 2022b) and the vaquita (Phocoena sinus) (CEMDA, 2021) are facing imminent ex�nc�on.
Further, more than 500,000 cetaceans are being killedworldwide annually, by ﬁshing gear bycatch and otherhuman ac�vi�es (FAO, 2021).
The ICR 1987 incep�on as a general incorporated founda�on came as a direct result of the moratorium establishment. However, the history of our ins�tu�on goes further back in �me: ICR is, in reality, older than the 40-year
IWC moratorium. The introduc�on of the moratorium
brought an abrupt halt to Japanʼs commercial coastal andhigh seas whaling. The 1987 reorganiza�on of our ins�tu�on was a direct result of the moratorium establishment
and the proac�ve measures by Japan to undertake a research program in the Antarc�c to systema�cally collectscien�ﬁc data necessary for the resump�on of that ac�vity, ideally under the aegis of the IWC.
Harking back to the �me when Japanʼs whaling inthe Antarc�c resumed a�er the WWII, a ﬁrsthand witness wrote the following: ʻA unique thing is happening
in Japan today. ( . . . ) Their islands do not have space todevote to growing food for domestic animals. Hence theirmeat must come largely from the sea. ( . . . ) When General MacArthur authorized two whaling ﬂeets to operate in Antarctic waters during 1946–47, he undoubtedly
expected objections to be raised by competitor whalingnations. But his reason was partly humanitarian. Japanneeded the proteins and fats ( . . . ) of whale meat andblubber. ( . . . ) No one can deny that Japan utilizes thewhale more than other nations do––they actually eat themeat and blubber, which is more than anyone else does,
except the Eskimos.ʼ (McCracken, 1948). It seems several
countries protested then against Japanʼs vessels going tothe Antarc�c, because of the postwar turmoil and poli�cal situa�on. The ICRʼs origins go back to such �mes. TheIns�tute was born at a �me of need for food, while theworldʼs whaling industry was compe�ng for increasingly
dwindling resources. Whaling was for oil as a resource,
but some countries, as is the case today, were pursuingthis ac�vity for food. Such was the case of Japan then, asit is now.
What was then the need for establishing an ins�tu�on
specialized in whale research, several decades before themoratorium? The parent ins�tu�on, or the originator ofICR was the Nakabe Ins�tute of Science, founded in 1941.
In 1942 it became an incorporated founda�on with theﬁrst approval from the Planning Agency. A�er the endof the war, the facili�es and researchers of the NakabeIns�tute of Science had not been dispersed and weres�ll available. According to one of the founders, if there
had been no war, the Nakabe Ins�tute of Science wouldhave con�nued to exist and perform the ac�vi�es of its
future successor, the Whales Research Ins�tute (WRI)(Maruyama, 1959).
In 1946, the year following the end of WWII, with themomentum of two of the three authorized whaling ﬂeets
actually going out to the Southern Ocean to help overcome the food shortage, a plan was made to establish anins�tu�on specializing in whale research, and on August20, 1947, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry OrderNo. 22-4014 authorized the establishment of the WRI(Ikeda, 1988). Ever since, un�l the 1987 incep�on of thepresent ICR, our ins�tu�on was a rare, world-renowned
private biological research ins�tute in the ﬁshery industry, with an already long history of 40 years and outstanding scien�ﬁc achievements contribu�ng to cetology andwhale resource management worldwide (Ikeda, 1988).
Without taking account of this historical fact, cri�cism
against ICR scien�ﬁc ac�vi�es would lack solid ground.
The charter of the WRI emphasized the importance of
the whaling industry, the eﬃciency of whale ﬁshing andprocessing technology, and the necessity of thoroughu�liza�on of whale products. It called for the expansionof research and the implementa�on of systema�c andcomprehensive research on whale stocks, and the applica�on of the results for the public beneﬁt (Ikeda, 1988),
while the stated purpose of establishment of ICR is ʻtocontribute to the proper management and u�liza�on ofﬁshery resources by conduc�ng research on cetaceans
and other marine mammals, as well as studies on related57

Technical Reports of the Ins�tute of Cetacean Research (2022)

interna�onal ma�ers.ʼ
One may argue that the pres�ge gained then by theWRI and later ICR, was due in part to the long-year
proliﬁc inven�ve and strenuous eﬀorts of its outstanding researchers, but it is also due to the fact that since
its origins, the ins�tute has had an established system
to reach out and publicize its ac�vi�es. The publica�onof the Geiken Tsushin newsle�er con�nues even today,
and was planned at the same �me as the publica�onof the English-language The Scientiﬁc Reports of theWhales Research Institute (SRWRI), ﬁrst published in1948 (Maruyama, 1959). Although the SRWRI journal hadto be discon�nued when the moratorium introduc�onmade mandatory for all ICR research staﬀ to apply anddevote themselves to scien�ﬁc produc�on oriented todiscussions at the IWC Scien�ﬁc Commi�ee, the edi�onof the now ﬁve-year old Technical Reports of the Instituteof Cetacean Research (TEREP-ICR) may be consideredpart of these agelong eﬀorts to reach both to the publicand scholars.
While ins�tu�onal introspec�on is always necessary, inpar�cular for a highly specialized and small organiza�onas the ICR, perhaps a renewed appraisal about the ins�tuteʼs nature, its background, origins and achievements
thus far, is in order. Hopefully more and more people
would understand be�er Japanʼs a�tude towards whalesand whaling, and perhaps bear in mind the unchanging
importance, both domes�c and interna�onal, of the present and future role of our ins�tute.

REFERENCES
Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental. 2021. Estrategias
de Conservación de la Vaquita Marina. Propuestas enla Administración Federal 2018–2024, Análisis de contexto, Julio, 2020. Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental,Cuauhtémoc, Mexico. 29 pp. h�ps://www.cemda.org.mx/wpcontent/uploads/2021/03/CEM-informe-vaquitamarina.pdf.
Food and Agriculture Organiza�on. 2021. Fishing Operations.
Guidelines to Prevent and Reduce Bycatch of Marine
Mammals in Capture Fisheries. FAO Technical Guidelines for
Responsible Fisheries No. 1, Suppl. 4. Food and Agriculture
Organiza�on, Rome, Italy. 118 pp. h�ps://doi.org/10.4060/cb2887en.

58

Food and Agriculture Organiza�on. 2022. The State ofWorld Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022. Towards Blue
Transformation. Food and Agriculture Organiza�on, Rome,Italy. 266 pp. h�ps://doi.org/10.4060/cc0461en.
Ikeda, I. 1988. Zaidan Houjin Nihon Geirui Kenkyusho no hossoku ni saishite. Geiken Tsushin 372: 1–5.
Interna�onal Whaling Commission. 2019. Statement on
Government of Japan withdrawal from the IWC. h�ps://iwc.int/resources/media-resources/news/statement-ongovernment-of-japan-withdrawal.
(Accessedon22
August 2022).
Interna�onal Whaling Commission. 2022. Commercial whaling. h�ps://iwc.int/management-and-conserva�on/whaling/commercial. (Accessed on 31 August 2022).
Kolmaš M. 2020. Interna�onal pressure and the Japanese withdrawal from the Interna�onal Whaling Commission: Whenshaming fails. Australian Journal of International Aﬀairs 75(2): 197–216.
Maruyama, T. 1959. Geiken Tsushin no omoide. Geiken Tsushin
100: 1–3.
McCracken, D.R. 1948. Four Months on a Jap Whaler. FirstEdi�on. Robert M. Mc Bride & Co., New York, USA. 228 pp.
Na�onal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra�on. 2022a.
Celebra�ng 50 Years of the Marine Mammal Protec�on Act.
News, 30 July 2022. h�ps://www.ﬁsheries.noaa.gov/featurestory/celebra�ng-50-years-marine-mammal-protec�on-act.
(Accessed on 31 August 2022).
Na�onal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra�on. 2022b. NorthAtlan�c Right Whale. Species Directory, 16 September 2022.
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlanticright-whale#overview. (Accessed on 27 September 2022).
New York Times. 1972. Whaling halt urged in Stockholm.
The New York Times, 10 June 1972. h�ps://www.ny�mes.
com/1972/06/10/archives/whaling-halt-urged-in-stockholm.
html. (Accessed on 31 August 2022).
Robards, M.D. and Reeves, R.R. 2011. The global extent andcharacter of marine mammal consump�on by humans:
1970–2009. Biological Conservation 144: 2770–2786.
U.S. Government Prin�ng Oﬃce. 1982. Review of the 34thInternational Whaling Commission Meeting: Hearing Before
the Subcommittee on Human Rights and International
Organizations of the Committee of Foreign Aﬀairs, Houseof Representatives, Ninety-seventh Congress, second session, September 16, 1982. U.S. Government Prin�ng Oﬃce,Washington, USA. 100 pp.