Sue, I believe the bottom line of your piece is that Greenpeace would be much more effective in Washington DC or Tokyo than rousting about in the Southern Ocean.

Can we pack them all off to distant lands now?

I thought the bottom line was a bit different, "stop hunting whales because you find them tasty but we like them". The same is basically true for dogs in Korea, cows in India, and so on.

Perhaps a more important issue is over fishing in general. Most shark species (and many other large fish) are endangered in Australia -- yet last week some fishermen and the television were glorifying the catch of one (a bronze whaler ?) which might not have been hanging around had not the fisherman dumped a large piece of tuna (also endangered) in the water to catch it. Other rather obvious examples are places like Victoria market where you can find a fair few species that are endangered, and some that we don't even know the populations of.

THe oceans and its critters are things we should care about -- before spending huge amounts of resources on a politically difficult problem, why not start at home ?

The most effective way for Greenpeace or others interested in stopping whaling would be to follow the example of the buga-up campaigners who helped phase out cigarette advertising.

What they should do is to attempt to make killing whales futile, by rendering the meat of the dead whale unfit for human consumption. They should do this by firing a small harpoon into the dead whale, before it can be loaded onto the Japanese ship. The tip of the harpoon would contain a small amount of arsenic, cadmium, cyanide or other such material which would make Japanese consumers reluctant to eat any part of the meat.

This action may not even be illegal, as it would occur on the high seas, and the dead whale could not be considered to belong to the Japanese until it had been loaded onto their ship. They would certainly not be harming the whale, which would already be dead.

Anti-whaling campaigners never seem to answer what seems to be a key question: Are there enough whales of the type that the Japanese and others are looking to harvest (usually Minke whales) to support a farming program? The Japanese say that they believe that there are tens of thousands of Minke whales and that they could successfully harvest a few hundred of these a year and still maintain a viable population. Is this true? It seems a reasonable question to answer.

Greenpeace and others never seem to clearly answer this question though which makes me suspect that it possibly is true. Simply claiming that whaling of all types should be banned because whales are 'noble creatures' or something similiar really is just emotion over practicality.

Japanese have a different viewpoint to us. We once slaughtered whales almost to extinction, we now see what mighty creatures they are. We see them as wondrous tourist experiences, not something that comes on a plate. Or in a can.
Asians have just about fished their oceans bare now
they are coming into ours where we have rules and regulations and Asians, using the fear of trade, will strip our oceans as well. Knowing that we cannot police our waters, they will ignore our conservation.
If we permit them to use our facilities in any way, that will condone their barbarism.

There is nothing barbarious about killing a whale for food. If that whale is hunted unsustainably it should be treated like overfishing or overhunting of any other species - unsustainable takes.

Calling the Japanese barbarians for engaging in an activity which helped build our nation's wealth, which is a way of life for people in many parts of the Northern Hemisphere, and which is nothing unlike taking a fish from the sea is surely unproductive. Why not encourage the Japanese to take whales which are abundant, like Orcas, until other stocks have replenished to a sustainable level, rather than deride them as barbarians? Why don't we call Indonesian fishermen barbarians when they fish illegally in our waters?

"Why not encourage the Japanese to take whales which are abundant, like Orcas"

Because Orca's aren't whales, they're a breed of dolphin.

The Japanese need to study whales for the survival of their economy and society - not dolphins.

One can only wonder how our country has survived all these years without researching whale after whale after whale...

Soon the Japanese will know so much about whales, there'll be none left!

Their research will then be about as usful as my job testing matches at the match factory.

"Why not encourage the Japanese to take whales which are abundant, like Orcas"

Minkes are plenty abundant. There are hundreds of thousands of Minkes in the Southern Oceans, and Japan's take is much less than a thousand per year.

All it comes down to is cultural imperialism. Western environmental activists believe Japan should not hunt whales because Western environmental activists believe whales are cute. End of story. There is no other rational opposition to the harvest of Minke whales.

Does anybody know if whale oil will work in my bullbar equipped, diesel four wheel drive?

Dick and Yobbo I think you're right regarding Minke whales. They are not an endangered species.

Yobbo there is another rational argument to killing whales and that is cruelty. Whales are shot by harpoons tipped with exploding grenades. The whales can take a long time to die and suffer terribly during this time because they are still conscious. If the harpoon shot does not kill the whale (approx 50% of the time) the whale is dragged to the ship and shot at with guns. It can take many shots to kill a whale, and some take an hour to die. We wouldn't let cows or sheep be killed like this, so why allow such cruel killing of whales? RSPCA guidelines for slaughter are that animals should be killed instantaneously or instantaneously rendered insensible to pain until death supervenes.

I think it would be okay to hunt and eat whales on two conditions:
1. The whales were not an endangered species; and
2. The whales did not suffer while being killed.

I'd rather have a good life in the ocean and die miserably like a relatively small number of whales than be a battery chicked or pig all my life. Being a milking cow doesn't look like a whole lot of fun either. Hunting is also legal in Australia, and I presume a fair few ducks etc. don't die a particularily quick death as well. Why should whales get special treatment ?

Pedant thanks for your post. It's about the only sensible and straight-forward explanation of a reason for not killing whales (or atleast not killing them as they are currently killed) that I've seen. I agree that we should atleast look to slaughter them as humanely as possible as we try to do with cows or other animals.

Having lived in Japan for a while I know that Japanese cultural attitudes to the treatment of animals can be quite different from our own. However, if the Japanese were given a fair comprimise whereby they were allowed to farm whales in exchange for coming up with more humane ways of slaughtering them then I think that they would be quite cooperative. It really seems to be the emotion driven garbage from the west that is causing this issue to be so imflamed.

Is somebody going to do something about the cruelty to seals that is inflicted by killer whales? If we are going to get tough with the Japanese for cruelty then maybe we should take the killer whales to task also.

Pedant ,

I thought that the following might slightly improve your excellent suggestion :

1. The whales were not an endangered species or at risk of becoming an endangered species; and
2. The whales did not suffer while being killed or captured.

RC is right whales shouldn't get special treatment - we should improve the way we deal with all animals. The caged egg industry needs to take a long hard look at itself and the Govt should phase it out ASAP if it can't be made humane.

I once saw a live crab placed straight into boiling water and I was disgusted. The simple step of putting them in the freezer for a while to put them to sleep and then cooking them proves that a humane solution can be found to most if not all situations.

There would be a lot fewer missed harpoon shots if whalers didn't have to shoot around the moronic hippies who are trying to get themselves martyred for their idiotic religion.

QUOTE: We wouldn't let cows or sheep be killed like this, so why allow such cruel killing of whales?

RESPONSE: Whales live a good life and some whales die a horrid death. On the other hand some domestic animals live a horrible life and then die a painless death. I am thinking veal calves and battery hens.

On balance I would rather live wild and free and then die a painful protracted death, rather than live caged and tormented and then die a painless death.

No doubt many whales that die naturally also die a horrible death. I doubt that a beached whale departs this world without suffering.