Submission by the Pew Environment Group on the “IWC Proposed Consensus Decision to Improve the Conservation of Whales"

Washington- 26 April, 2010

The Pew Environment Group welcomes the following aspects of the “Proposed Consensus Decision to Improve the Conservation of Whales” tabled by the Chair and Vice-Chair of the IWC on 22 April, 2010(1):

• all whaling would be brought under international oversight and control (including significant improvements in the international compliance and observer scheme);
• unilateral so-called scientific whaling under special permits now taking place would be eliminated, and the current abuse of ICRW Article VIII would end;
• the number of whaling countries would be restricted;
• the international trade in whale meat and other whale products would be ended, by restricting consumption to domestic markets, thus removing an incentive for an expansion of commercial whaling by exporting countries;   
• the broader reform of the IWC would be begun, to start to bring it in line with best practice in contemporary international environmental law; 
• the IWC would address the full range of the many and significant threats to whales from human activities; and 
• a South Atlantic Whale Sanctuary would be created;

We note that the numbers in Table 4 (page 15) are described in the document (pages 2 and 3) as “example numbers”, “as a package [will] [be] disliked by all for one reason or another”, and  “...merely there to stimulate the necessary intense discussions and negotiations prior to Agadir.”  We therefore provide these comments to help stimulate these “discussions and negotiations”. The Proposed Consensus Decision lacks the following key elements without which it would fail to put the international whale conservation regime on the right course:

• End all whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary. The IWC adopted the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary at its 46th Annual Meeting in 1994 (2). This clearly prohibits all commercial whaling. As such, no whaling should be sanctioned or legitimized within the boundaries of the Sanctuary. The current proposal in Table 4 includes 400 Antarctic minke whales to be killed per year from 2010/11-2014/15, reducing to 200 thereafter. Japan announced that it killed 506 whales in its most recent 2009/10 Antarctic whaling expedition. It is vital that whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary be ended within the timeframe of the proposed decision.
• No takes of vulnerable species and populations. The suggested inclusion of fin whales in Table 4 is not acceptable. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) classifies the fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) as Endangered (3) and they are protected by a number of IWC decisions, all of which would have to be overridden for a take to be allowed (4).  No killing of fin whales should be permitted or envisaged.
• Reduce the overall period of implementation from 10 to 5 years. It would be wrong for the IWC to shirk its responsibility by passing outstanding issues on to another generation in ten years time. We therefore propose that the period of implementation of the proposed decision contained in the document be scaled down from ten to five years.
• Ensure that any catch limits that are set are calculated by the IWC Scientific Committee using the IWC’s agreed Revised Management Procedure (RMP), with 0.72 tuning level. The wording in the present draft is ambiguous; it does not specify the IWC’s agreed version nor that catch limits must be calculated by the Scientific Committee. It also does not specify that there should be downward adjustment for bycatch and other human-caused mortalities, as established by the IWC.  Catch limits (outside of the Southern Ocean Sanctuary) should not exceed those calculated by the Scientific Committee using the published version of the RMP, as contained in the IWC’s Journal of Cetacean Research and Management (Suppl.) 1:251-254 and relevant footnote, with a tuning level of 0.72.

We urge the IWC to agree to the above four elements in order to increase the chance of adopting a package in Agadir that can be viewed as environmentally visionary and fair.

We also emphasize the importance of the following positive elements in the draft:

• Conservation Programme Committee.We commend the text on page 6, which addresses ongoing and emerging threats to cetaceans, including climate change, marine pollution, bycatch and entanglement by fishing activities, ship strikes, noise pollution, and habitat degradation.
• Maintaining and supporting the CITES Appendix I listings of the great whales. We commend the text on page 8 that states that no amendment of the Schedule arising from this consensus decision supersedes or invalidates prior IWC Resolutions relating to CITES and international trade, including Resolution 2007/4. The CITES Appendix I listings of the great whales must be maintained, and IWC Members States should remove their reservations to those listings and agree not to engage in international commercial trade in whales, whale parts or products. We commend the Schedule Amendment on page 12, which limits the use of any products from any whale taken in accordance with Table 4, or any other circumstances, to domestic use in the country or territory that killed the whale.
• Maintaining the moratorium on commercial whaling. We commend the text on page 6 which makes it clear that the proposed decision would mandate that paragraph 10(e) of the Schedule (the moratorium on commercial whaling) is kept in place.
• Recognizing the non-lethal value and uses of whales. It is encouraging that the Proposed Decision recognizes the non-lethal value and uses of whales, such as whale-watching, as a management option for coastal states and addresses related scientific, conservation and management issues of such uses.
• Enhanced monitoring, enforcement and control measures.  Monitoring, control, and surveillance measures such as the proposed international observers and vessel monitoring provisions are steps in the right direction. More work needs to be done on the provisions regarding DNA registries to ensure maximum transparency and data accessibility.

The Pew Environment Group looks forward to working with all IWC members and interested stakeholders over the next two months, with a view to reaching a positive conclusion to the discussions on the future of the IWC.

The meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity takes place in October of this year, bringing together the international community to work on the conservation of species and ecosystems across our planet.  In that spirit, we call upon the IWC member governments, in this, the International Year of Biodiversity, to take meaningful, positive action for the sake of marine biodiversity, particularly whales. We look forward to the adoption of a decision at IWC62 that truly modernizes and reforms the IWC, brings it into the 21st Century, recognizes the environmental fragility of whale populations across the oceans in such a way that it protects them for the long term, and maintains the integrity of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary as a safe-haven for whales.

For further information and background on the Pew Whale Conservation Project, please visit www.pewwhales.org. For further information on the Pew Environment Group, please visit www.pewenvironment.org

(1) Document IWC 62/7 at http://www.iwcoffice.org/_documents/commission/IWC62docs/62-7.pdf
(2) http://www.iwcoffice.org/commission/schedule.htm
(3) http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/2478/0
(4)These include the so-called “pelagic moratorium” IWC Schedule paragraph 10(d) and the Protection Stock classification found in the current Schedule Table 1, in addition to the commercial whaling moratorium and the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

Click here to download Pew's accompanying letter to IWC Commisioners