IWC/51/OS JSTWA

Japan’s Twelve-year Battle for
Coastal Minke Whaling:
Twelve Years of Frustration(courtesy: Shoko Museum of Arts)

I. Absurd, Absurd, Absurd
In retrospect, it does seem absurd: that foralmost all of the last decade of the 20th century,
one of the world’s leading developed economies wasforced to spent millions of man-hours and dollars
trying valiantly to minimise all traces of commercial aspects (for which read monetary exchange)from one of its traditional industries....
And that it, in good faith, undertook these futile
attempts to conform to blatantly and irresponsibly
anti-scientific whimsies of co-signatories to aninternational agreement which, in its very preamble, referred to providing “for the proper conservation” of resources to “... make possible orderlydevelopment” of the industry which depended uponthese resources.
It is indeed absurd, for in the global monetarysystem of the 1990s, no one anywhere could engage

in any whaling activity at any level of technicalsophistication without at least some cash transactions for gear, equipment, and related necessities.
Nonetheless, Japan’s small-type coastal
whalers, working with the Government of Japan,
have tried and tried and tried yet again to answer
the increasingly specious, increasingly transparently anti-whaling objections of the — ironically —anti-whaling members of the International
Whaling Commission (IWC).
Why? Because, unlike a majority of the othernations which signed the International Convention
for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW), Japan
thought it important, essential actually, to continue
to honour its commitment not only to the orderly
development of the whaling industry, but also toestablish an international system for whaling thatwould ensure proper and effective conservation anddevelopment of whale stocks.
Japan had also thought that because theJapanese small-type coastal whaling is, perhaps,
not so easily understood as an industry in Western
20th century terms for at least three interrelated
reasons:

Whaling Vessel “Yasumaru No.1” in Operation in 1987
(courtesy: SHIMOMICHI Yoshiichi)

ICRW’s preamble included the acknowledgementthat achieving this optimum condition should happen “without causing widespread economic andnutritional distress” that its small-type coastal
community whalers would not at any time suffer.
Wrong. Unfortunately, it has not worked thatway. Quite the opposite. And even IWC itself hasrecognised this — nearly six years ago at the 45th
IWC meeting in Kyoto. The resolution theCommission passed then affirmed that the IWC
would work expeditiously to alleviate the distressto Japan’s four coastal whaling communities which
the cessation of minke whaling had caused. (TheNorth Pacific minke whales are not now nor never
have been either threatened or endangered, but themoratorium in 1982 was written so broadly thatthey were included.)
Despite this 1993 resolution, however, nothing
has happened. The Government of Japan and theJapanese coastal whalers have, each and every
year since then tried (the IWC record now includes
some 50 papers in support of the Japanese smalltype whalers by scientists and scholars fromaround the world) to answer the increasingly
unreasonable and unrealistic demands to de-commercialise their traditional industry.
All to naught. Their honest efforts have brought
only ever-more disingenuous objections from theanti-whaling zealots.
It is now clear that the anti-whaling nations will
never be satisfied. So, for the Japanese small-type
coastal whalers, frustration has finally entirelyreplaced their hopes that just one more accommodation, one more retreat from the fundamentals of
their industry, would finally convince all thedoubters — or at least enough of them — of theircommunities’ desperate need for relief from theunnecessary North Pacific minke whaling moratorium.
Whaling is, after all, an industry, and thus, bydefinition, involves financial transactions. But

Currently Beached Whaling Vessel “Yasumaru No.1”, Anxiously Waiting for
the Resumption of Minke Whaling (courtesy: SHIMOMICHI Yoshiichi)(1) it takes place in a culture whose underlying
philosophies are fundamentally different from
Western culture;(2) specifically, the large number of community
social and spiritual elements which are equallypart of small-type coastal whaling apparently distract the inattentive and unwilling from seeingthat this traditional form of whaling is a profession,
a way to make a living to enable the whalers, theirfamilies, and their communities to continue to livein ways which have made their lives meaningful
for generations and which have not harmed theresources on which it is dependent; and(3) it is now a relatively unusual industry —although international history clearly shows us it
has not always been so.
Now, finally, after a dozen years, surely it must
be understood that these people and their communities have earned, with all of their good faithefforts, the right to return to the way of life ofwhich politically-motivated, unscientific emotionalism has deprived them.
A dozen years of working for justice and logic toprevail is many years too long. The IWC by now
must recognise that the communities of Abashiri,Ayukawa, Wada and Taiji should be free to resume
coastal whaling — which, under the ICRW, should
never have been interrupted, if the IWC itself is torecover any vestige of scientific credibility as a
responsible global management organisation —instead of one just frittering away its time andWhaling Festival in Taiji (courtesy: KAINO Yoshitsugu)

money trying to turn back the world’s economic
clock.

II. Absurd Scientifically, Absurd
Socially and Economically

Certainly, all of what the scientists havebeen learning about the importance of multispecies management reinforces the need tobroaden our approach to managing marine
resources to include whales as part of theecosystems in which they are found. Whales aresubstantial predators on fish and other species.
Not surprisingly, it has not worked to manage
them or other marine mammals in isolation.
It is the Okhotsk Sea stock of North Pacificminke whales in which Japan’s small-type
coastal whalers are interested, a robust stock
which has never been in any trouble. Indeed,
the IWC Scientific Committee had estimatedthat this stock stands at over 25,000 animals
and is capable of sustaining a limited catch—which is all the small-type coastal whalers areseeking. From 1951 until 1987, for example,
their average annual catch was 348 minke
whales, and their 1987 quota was 320 minkes.
Japanese small-type whaling was always a sustainable operation.

Economically and Socially Absurd
IWC’s long-running prejudice against Japan’s
small-type coastal whaling is demonstrably
absurd, not only scientifically, but also socially andeconomically. Even the briefest look at the facts
makes this clear.

Scientifically Absurd...
What, after all, is the intent of the ICRW: toconserve and to utilise whales, or merely to “protect” them and delay any responsible management
actions on their behalfs?
Japan and a minority of other IWC Members
have stressed that the ICRW is about conserving and using whales, not about only protecting
them. The Convention is also about using science as the basis for management. The so-called
morality and ethics of whaling has nothing to dowith science; it is delaying tactics.
But even if it were a legitimate concern
under the ICRW, there is a standard and widely-agreed-upon ethical principle governing theuse of living resources. Adopted by almost allmembers of the United Nations, it declaresresource use is justified, provided it is sustainable and does not damage biological diversity,and that such resource use should be encouraged if it promotes social and economic benefit.
Both the 1980 World Conservation Strategy
and the 1992 United Nations Earth Summit’s
Agenda 21 recognised the social and environmental benefits of sustainable resource use andurged implementation of this principle as a
responsible and desirable course of action.

Given that there are clearly commercial elements of the whaling operations of other groups
allowed to continue whaling, the argument
about commercialism in Japanese STCW is nota legitimate objection. Why have the “commercial” aspects of Japan’s small-type coastal whaling been an issue? Alaskan whalers buy equipment to go whaling and sell handicrafts madefrom whales they take and Japan’s STCW is no
more commercial than the approved Greenland
Inuit whaling operations. After all, they sellwhale products at local supermarkets. In addition, the well-documented cultural need ofJapan’s whaling communities to resume whaling is no less than that of a group of American
natives who have not been whaling for 70 years
but were given a quota at the 1997 meeting.

Minke Whales (courtesy: The Institute of Cetacean Research)the distress to these communities which has
resulted from the cessation of minke whaling.
In conclusion, not only is there limited alternative work available to these communities, butalso — and perhaps even more important — thecessation of minke whaling is slowly, and quite
unnecessarily, eroding in these places theirsense of community, their cultural heritage, andits practices. It is unnecessary, and it must stop.

III. Japan Is Committed to Restore
Small-type Coastal Whaling(courtesy: Shoko Museum of Arts)

Certainly, neither the debate about the commercial elements of Japan’s STCW nor the earlier “concern” opponents expressed regarding the“morality and ethics” of Japan’s STCW havemuch to do with IWC Members’ treaty responsibilities to manage whale resources. Rather, theyrepresent, for the Japanese, a frustrating 12
years of irresponsible political games, hypocrisy
and the application of double standards which
has caused severe hardships to Japan’s STCW
communities and resulted in a further erosion of
the IWC’s credibility as a responsible resource
management organisation.
Nor is the issue one of economics alone, forlife is much more than simply money withwhich to buy those things necessary for survival. Whaling, with its secondary and tertiaryindustries, is economically important. But as
well, around the work of a community evolvesocial and cultural practices which define thatcommunity. For the small-type coastal whaling
communities, whaling is the work around whichthese practices grew, defining their senses ofcommunity. It is their culture and part of thelarger culture of Japan. Decline of small-type
coastal whaling is causing disintegration ofthese communities. They are trying so hard to
overcome the almost-debilitating losses of population and income.
As whaling-related employment decreases, sodoes the essence of community. Both economics
and this diminished sense of community areforcing younger people to work and live elsewhere. Because of the locations of these communities and their relatively limited infrastructures, alternative jobs in whaling communities
remain too few to replace those which Westerncultures have taken from them by their continued insistence on the 1982 moratorium.
Even the IWC, in its 1993 resolution,
acknowledged the socio-economic and culturalneeds of the Japanese whaling communities andSix years ago, at the IWC meeting in Kyoto,
the chairman of the Japan Small-type Whaling
Association said,...Our lives [in Japan’s small-type whalingcommunities] are culturally simpler and economically simpler than the lives of those inJapan’s cities. But we too are part of the history
and the modern life of Japan.... We in simpler
communities also have responsibilities. We provide food for the people who share our lives. In
this way we make our contribution to society.
And we are proud that we make this contribution.
It is also our responsibility, our duty, and ourwish to pass on to the next generation this way ofliving and of contributing. Those who have nothing to do with our way of life in local communities have no right to try to deny us this responsibility.
For the whalers and their communities thisis how it is. Their very great efforts to resume
their traditional community way of life continues. And will continue.
To the IWC, they say it is time to stop unfairness and double standard toward Japan’s community-based whalers. Honour your treaty commitments and obligations. Japan and Japanesecommunity-based whalers have co-operated
with the IWC. If the IWC continues to ignore
our cultural, socio-economic and dietary needs,
Japan will be forced to take unilateral action todefend and maintain its whaling communities
and their people. Japan has heard enoughwords of “compassion.” Japan wants IWC
action. Now.

Japan Small-type Whaling Association
4-5-10-506, Honcho, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0012, JapanTEL: 03-5385-6121 FAX: 03-5385-6122
15 May 1999
Copyright 1999 Japan Small-type Whaling Association
All rights reserved.