U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1

89–011 2001

107th Congress, 1st Session – – – – – – – – – – – – – House Document 107–11

REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF

THE INTERNATIONAL WHALING CONVENTION (IWC)

CONSERVATION PROGRAM

COMMUNICATION

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

TRANSMITTING

A REPORT CONCERNING JAPAN’S RESEARCH WHALING ACTIVITIES

THAT DIMINISH THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERNATIONAL

WHALING CONVENTION (IWC) CONSERVATION PROGRAM, PURSUANT TO SECTION 8 OF THE FISHERMEN’S PROTECTIVE ACT

OF 1967, 22 U.S.C. 1978 (THE PELLY AMENDMENT)

JANUARY 3, 2001.—Referred jointly to the Committees on International

Relations and Resources, and ordered to be printed

(1)

THE WHITE HOUSE,

Washington, December 29, 2000.

Hon. J. DENNIS HASTERT,

Speaker of the House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. SPEAKER: On September 13, 2000, the Secretary of

Commerce certified that Japan had authorized its nationals to conduct research whaling activities that diminish the effectiveness of

the International Whaling Convention (IWC) conservation program.

This message constitutes my report to the Congress pursuant to

section 8 of the Fishermen’s Protective Act of 1967, 22 U.S.C. 1978

(the Pelly Amendment).

Secretary Mineta’s certification was the third against Japan for

scientific research whaling. The first was in 1988, when Japan initiated its Antarctic program that now entails an annual take of 440

minke whales. The second was in 1995, after Japan extended its

program to the North Pacific, where it has been taking 100 minke

whales per year. This year, despite a specific resolution passed by

the majority of IWC parties calling on Japan to refrain from conducting lethal research in the North Pacific, Japan expanded its

program in the North Pacific to permit the take of 10 sperm whales

and 50 Bryde’s whales. The total harvest in this summer’s hunt

was 40 minke whales, 5 sperm whales, and 43 Bryde’s whales. I

remain very concerned about Japan’s decision to expand its research whaling to two additional species.

I also remain concerned about Japan’s practice of taking whales

in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary north of Antarctica. This

is an internationally recognized sanctuary that was approved by

the IWC. I see no justification for Japan’s practice and will continue to urge Japan to reconsider its policy, which I believe undermines the effectiveness of whale sanctuaries everywhere. I note in

addition that Japan’s practice is clearly out of step with the growing international consensus in support of whale sanctuaries, and in

sharp contrast to the strong leadership that Mexico and Brazil

have both shown in the last 3 months in designating areas off their

coasts as whale sanctuaries.

Along with many other members of the IWC, the United States

believes the Japanese research whaling program has dubious scientific validity. Information relevant to management of whale

stocks can be collected by nonlethal techniques. Products of the research harvest are sold in Japanese markets, which raises questions about the true motivation for the program. In addition, Japan

has conducted the same set of scientific research experiments on

significant numbers of minke whales for more than 10 years.

I want to underscore that concerns about Japan’s lethal scientific

whaling program are not simply a bilateral matter. A substantial

2

majority of IWC members share our concern and want Japan to

curtail its program.

My Administration has already taken a wide range of economic

and diplomatic measures in response to Japan’s expanded program.

On September 13, I directed the Secretary of State to make Japan

ineligible to conduct fishing operations within the United States exclusive economic zone. I, members of my Cabinet, and other United

States officials, have raised our strong concerns at the highest levels of the Japanese Government and will continue to do so. I have

personally intervened with Prime Minister Mori. We also joined 14

other governments in making a high-level demarche to the Japanese Government to protest its decision to issue the permits. In

September, we canceled a bilateral fisheries meeting that we have

been holding annually for more than a decade. We also declined to

participate in a ministerial meeting on environmental issues in August hosted by Japan. We have also actively supported the selection of a country other than Japan to host the next intersessional

meeting of the IWC. As a result, the IWC voted 17–10 to hold the

meeting in Monaco instead of Tokyo.

The United States has intensified its serious engagement on

these issues with Japan. In November, we held bilateral consultations with Japan in Tokyo on scientific research on whales. At that

meeting, we appreciated receiving the news that Japan is preparing to conduct two nonlethal scientific whale programs in the

next 12 months. This is a very encouraging sign. We expect our bilateral meeting will lead to an IWC Scientific Committee workshop

on methods for whale research. I view this meeting as a positive

but limited step. Our goal remains that Japan substitute nonlethal

techniques for its program. We will vigorously pursue this objective

in conjunction with our partners in the IWC.

We are concerned that the presence of these additional species of

whales in the Japanese market could increase the risk of derivatives of whale products entering international commerce. To this

end, we have raised these matters within the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, and an interagency team

continues to consider additional measures to enforce international

and national prohibitions on trade in whale products. If warranted,

the Secretaries of Commerce and the Treasury will take appropriate additional measures.

In sum, I remain deeply concerned by Japan’s unilateral actions.

For this reason, I have directed the Departments of State, Commerce, the Interior, and the Treasury, as well as the Office of the

United States Trade Representative, to keep this matter under active review. I will also direct these agencies to further examine the

relationship between Japanese companies that both manufacture

whaling equipment and export products to the U.S. market. I

would consider actions regarding any imports from whaling equipment manufacturers, as well as actions regarding a broader range

of imported products, should they be warranted by lack of progress

from our bilateral and multilateral efforts; however, I do not believe that import prohibitions would further our objectives at this

3

time. We are committed to a sustained effort in order to bring

about positive movement in Japan’s whaling policies.

Sincerely,

WILLIAM J. CLINTON.

Æ