Thursday, January 19, 2006

The Greenpeace Japanese Whale Wars

The nation of Japan might be looking at the environmental group Greenpeace as an annoyance, but I'm sure the Japanese Whaling industry considers them to be about on the same level as the Western world tends to view Al-Queda. After all, there are livelihoods at stake here, indeed the industry as a whole stands to lose both in monetary terms and to an extent in public relations. Whatever the case, Greenpeace is adamant, that it will put a stop if at all possible to what it considers the abominable practice of "scientific whaling" which they seem to think, and probably rightly so, is a disguise for simple corporate plunder of marine life.

To this extent, they have employed two old vessels to the area around the Antarctic-the Esperanzo and the Arctic Sunrise. One of these shops was rammed by a Japanese fishing vessel in the Antarctic waters . In fact, one of the Greenpeace activists came dangerously close to getting harpooned.

The Greenpeace statistics I would not recomend be taken at face value, but for what they are worth for the moment, here they are. In the eighteen years since scientific whaling became permitted by the U.N, 6800 whales have been killed by the Japanese whalers. In all the 31 years prior to this only 840 whals were massacred. Quite a significant increase, as noted by the environmental group, for a program that was intnded as ameasure to protect the whales.

The first question I would ask is, just what the hell is scientific whaling to begin with? Is it the oceanic equivalent of thinning out the herd? If so, it seems unecessary, as I believe the herd is dangerously thin to begin with. Is it providfing tracking reseach to scientists in exchange for being allowed to kill a percentage? And do they stick to these quotas? What if they do not? If they do not, would anyone be in a position to know? If they know, do they really care?

Finally,as this possibly involves the U.N., the question which might be the most important of all? Does this have the makings of a "blubber for food" scandal?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Nice analysis

mynewsbot.com