Joint Message from the Pew Environment Group and WWF International to IWC Commissioners

6th December, 2008

Dear Commissioner to the International Whaling Commission,

We are writing to share our views on the adoption of Motion 37 “Relationship between Fisheries and Great Whales” by the IUCN World Conservation Congress (WCC) held in Barcelona in the month of October. We believe that this motion is quite significant for the work of the IWC. 

The motion was a product of a draft submitted several months in advance of the WCC by WWF, the Pew Environment Group and several other NGOs. The WCC  takes place every four years, and we thought it was important  to address claims that whales could adversely affect food security,  which had been made since the previous congress held in 2004 (for example, such claims were reflected in the StKitts Declaration of 2006 and in the Rabat Declaration of 2008).

When the WCC began, we were extremely pleased that representatives of the Governments of Japan and Norway volunteered to discuss with us ways to find common ground.   Over the course of five days, we had extensive and constructive conversations with representatives of these two countries, and several others including representatives of Australia, New Zealand, the United States, and Sweden. As a result, we reached agreement on almost the entire text of the motion that was finally adopted.  

With Japan and Norway, we agreed that Operative Paragraph 1 would read “acknowledges that there is inadequate scientific information to support an assertion that controlling great whale populations can increase fisheries yields.”   However, during the plenary, this paragraph was amended by Australia to read “acknowledges that the great whales play no significant role in the current crisis affecting global fisheries.”  Unfortunately, the fast-paced nature of plenary sessions did not allow for a full debate with all interested parties on whether this amendment was acceptable to all.  The amended motion was subsequently adopted by a considerable majority of both the government (91.30% in favour and only 8.70% against) and NGO voting chambers, in accordance with IUCN rules (voting record available here).

As we did during the WCC we would like to thank the Governments of Japan, Norway, and others for their commitment to seek consensus with us on this issue.  We believe that this motion, including Japan’s and Norway’s support to the original text of Operative Paragraph 1 as presented to plenary, argues that  claims suggesting that the great whales can be a threat to fisheries are unfounded.  Moreover, we remain committed to working with all interested governments,  to promote the sustainable fisheries and marine biodiversity conservation measures identified in Operative Paragraph 2 of the motion.

We also note and welcome the support by Japan and Norway of Operative Paragraph 4, which “encourages the use of non-lethal research methods by members engaged in studies on the biology and behaviour of whales, including their feeding habits”. This paragraph is particularly relevant because although  the Japanese fleet is now on its way to the Southern Ocean, to our knowledge Japan has not yet notified the IWC of the details of the 2008-09 research programme.  We share the views of many governments and NGOs that the Japanese Government should restrict its research programme this year to non-lethal research. This would not only be in keeping with the spirit of the WCC motion’s Operative Paragraph 4, but also with the collective commitment of IWC parties to secure and maintain a conducive environment while the “Future of the IWC” process is on-going. Despite twenty years of scientific whaling conducted with the aim of providing  scientific information on whales/fisheries interactions,   at the WCC Japan and Norway agreed “that there is inadequate scientific information to support an assertion that controlling great whale populations can increase fisheries yields”, thus showing that the primary stated goal of scientific whaling has failed.

Our respective organizations remain committed to working in good faith with all IWC member States with a view to reinforcing and improving the international whale conservation regime.  Thank you for considering our views.

Sincerely Yours,

Workshop - Whales and Fisheries Interactions: Are the Great Whales a Threat to Fisheries

Speakers and Presentations:

• Dr. Daniel Pauly (The Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia) - Effects of the ´whales-eat-fish´controversy on the food security of developing countries.
• Dr. Peter Corkeron (Visiting fellow, Bioacoustics Research Programme, Cornell) - When marine mammals did not affect fisheries...
• Prof. Justin Cooke (IUCN Cetacean Specialist Group) - Are the great whales a threat to fisheries?
• Dr. Kristin Kaschner (Lenfest Ocean Program) - Modelling the impact of great whales on fisheries in tropical ecosystems.

Moderator: Dr. Alex Aguilar (Department of Animal Biology, Barcelona University)

The workshop discussed  updated scientific  knowledge on the topic of the relationship between fisheries and great whales, including regional analyses of great whales and fisheries interactions in Western Africa and the Caribbean, and global evaluations of claims regarding the alleged impact of whales on fisheries resources.

The conclusions of the panel of speakers were:

1. Nowhere in the world are great whales a “threat” to fisheries. In those parts of the world where there is an  overlap of great whales with fisheries, specific analysis of the interactions indicate that there is no basis for concern.
2. The so called ‘whales eat fish’ controversy is being used by ministers from certain countries  member of the IWC to justify their support of pro-whaling interests. Speakers said that this was condemnable because it distracts from the much needed public debate about  overfishing, including the role of distant water fleets.
3. In tropical breeding areas, great whales eat considerably much less than fisheries take, and they eat mostly different prey than those targeted by the fisheries,  and they do not compete through direct or indirect interactions with fisheries.
4. Culling  great whales in tropical areas would not result in an increase of fisheries yields and would likely  have severe consequences with respect to ecosystem structure & resilience.
5. Furthermore, it was felt that this argument was counterproductive to the progression of science and fisheries management as it has diverted  resources  from more pressing and urgent research.