Well this is a rather strange article, it boils down to..."worse things happen at sea".
There are more important things to sort out there for we shouldn't say anything about our views on Whaling and if you do, your a racist?

Now as the author should know, Japan is a signatory to the banning of commercial whaling. The only whales being killed by Japan is part of a scientific investigation. Now what would be the authors view on say Aussie scientist killing endanged frogs in order to do studies on them. Add to that that there is a none lethal method of collecting the same data. I think the author needs to have a rethink.

It’s a mistake to refer to Tim Flannery. Once he was hammering over-population’s effect on the environment; now he never mentions population because it is not PC, and because both major political parties are immigration junkies.

Nevertheless, although Tyrell Heathcote will not win friends with her manner of addressing her audience, I tend to agree with her on whales. My only real objection to Japanese whaling is the ridiculous claim that it is being done for scientific purposes. Bunkum! Japanese are very smart people, and it beggars belief that they wouldn’t have known all that is to be known about whales long ago. And, the amount of whale eaten in Japan is falling, particularly among younger people. If you speak to the average Japanese you will find that they believe it is a matter of honour for their government not to give in.

If Australia could have stopped Japanese whale hunting, it would have. So, those on the band-wagon of protest are wasting their time.

My objections to whaling are the brutal way the whales are killed, that it is not necessary for scientific research and there is no real demand for whale meat in Japan. There are many other cruelties in the harvesting of wild animals and in commercial animal husbandry, but at least they are producing something for which there is a demand. Japan's determination to continue whaling for no reason other than saving face is hypocritical beyond belief.

So when did Japan start this so called cultural tradition of
harvesting whales in the Southern Ocean?

More then likely they nearly wiped out any whales close to Japan,
so now need to move into Australian territory to hunt.

Its not as if the Japanese are unable to afford to buy food, its
purely an ego trip that they are on right now, when it comes to
whales.

Whale watching is big business in Australia, including Japanese
tourists who want to see them in their natural habitat.
Its far larger as an industry then whaling hunting.

The Japanese claim that whales are "stealing fish" that humans
could eat. Perhaps they need to rethink that one.

As the Japanese clearly have no cultural tradition of hunting
whales in the Southern ocean, what are they doing stealing our
whales?

So because many species were imported into Australia in more ignorant times and damage soil, it's OK to kill whales that support a whole tourist industry ?

Comparing over fishing is hardly comparing apples with apples. Sure it is wrong, but fish and cattle and other live stock provide food that is necessary while whale meat is a substitute and not traditional, It is also only replaceable over a considerable period.

Perhaps we should kill elephant, lion and tigers, even koalas for their fur. That's just as traditional as harvesting whales.

As I have said many times in these columns, we should reduce the human population over time and a lot of these problems would disappear over night.

Tyrell
You make some fair points.
However your arguments don’t address your topic i.e. the cultural hypocrisy.
Rather you argued your case on sustainability and profit (not the same issue).

The Japanese eatcloven hooved meat meat and other fish so the cultural aspects are not excusive rendering your argument a nul.

About the krill depletion the biggest ships and therefore biggest perpetrators are in fact the Japanese and other Asians, Followed by the Sth Americans.

Flannery isn’t the only one just one of the most popular. I don’t want to spoil your research but I can think of at least 6.

The whaling ban is an international one. There are no such bans on tuna or orange roughies but there are catch limits/ excluded zones etc. which most professionals obey.
Murray cod sales today are from aquaculture. Size catch numbers seasons are enforced for amateur anglers in the wild.

I think the issue with many people isn’t so much the cultural aspects but:
• The duplicity of their “whale research”.
• Their bogus “scientific” methods. A recent scientific article search revealed 2 papers published in proper peer reviewed scientific publications since the ban and about 20 that weren’t accepted due to their trivial nature and lack of scientific value. The CSIRO that doesn’t kill and in the same time put has publish close to 20 high class papers.
• In reality the Japanese diet has gone more international. A program on that issue a few weeks back.
• Most people rightly Japan’s unwillingness to accept a legitimate ban as thumbing their noses at the rest of the world. A bit like the Canadian of some extremists’ ‘culture of clubbing baby seals to death’. Unsupportable in today’s world.
Might I suggest next time more factual research less emotion. The issues about sustainability is valid and one that needs looking at although some on this site deny AWG and want to maintain the same broken capitalist system.

Thank you Tyrell for exposing the hypocrisy of our feral green movement along with its admirers (national broadcasters). Now that Bush and Howard are gone they need something else to become violent about and then scream when the Japanese react.

Snake like a lot of other people you advocate the destruction of human beings, I most certainly hope you are among the first to volunteer, when the guns are loaded up and pointing at your chest I would just love to see your smiling face.

Ojnab,
I was hoping you would show a little more common sense. Just because snake advocates a reduction in world population does not mean he wants to go and shoot half the population. Science has given us contraception, which means we dont even have to stop copulating to reduce the population. I love that science.

Those that want to abort and those that practice infanticide can even keep their cultural practices as well, but if we reduce the population we reduce the need for food, and we save fish and other animals. Surely that is a simple thing to follow. Difficult part is to convince the religions.

In relation to the whales, I'm all for the krill. An ABC doc tonight said that each blue whale eats 4 million krill a day. One supposes others a little less, so each whale the Japs harvest saves about a billion krill per year. So Maybe the Japs are the real conservationists after all. Pale goes on about live animal exports and cruelty, sheez, being ingested alive and dieing by stomach juices would be like being dropped in an acid bath. Not very nice for the poor little krill.

So why is there not a world wide cry going up for the protection of krill from the genocide inflicted by whales?

Go the whalers and save the krill.

Tyrell

I agree that Australia's record on the abuse of its animals is unacceptable. I disagree with your assumption that we remain silent over that issue. In addition, I have read from Irish, English, Austrian, Middle Eastern, Israeli, French and American websites reporting on Australia's abusive treatment of its food animals and this country's rapid extinctions of native animals.

That does not excuse the Japanese pillaging of marine life or the abominable treatment of their own food animals:

http://www.chicagofoodies.com/2007/11/kobe-beef-and-c.html

Additionally, Antarctic krill are at the heart of the Southern Ocean food web, sustaining hundreds of species of fish, squid, whales, penguins, seals, albatrosses and other creatures.

There is a growing demand for Antarctic krill, as fish feed for the booming aquaculture industry. Krill serves as the foundation in the Southern Ocean food web. In addition to the increased demand, new vessel technologies are now in use that can substantially increase the catching and processing of krill, risking serious impacts to the Southern Ocean's marine ecosystem. As a result, much of our marine life are starving and we are consuming diseased, farmed fish from the mechanised madness which prevails.

Last November 64 stranded whales and their calves died on a Tasmanian beach. NZ saw 130 stranded whales previously and occurrences continue around the world. Scientists also express concern over naval sonar activities.

Turning the tables on nature making it subservient to man by neanderthal cultures such as ours, which continue to accelerate gratuitous consumption, will be forced to make trade-offs between environmental quality and a continuation of its consumption pattern.

And as we tuck into our juicy lamb chops from an abused and diseased animal and a cloven hooved animal species too, which has destroyed these arid lands, remember we have already entered the realms of the Sixth Extinction.

Man will not accept that notion but he does so at his peril.

I know that it is much more culturally acceptable for Australians to criticise themselves than it is for Australians to criticise others, but this article takes things a bit far.

1) Japan ostensibly supports the ban on commercial whaling.

2) Japan either lies about the 'scientific' motive for whaling, or is selfishly keeping the results of the research to themselves.

3) Japan has no historical record of whaling in Australian waters. While there is evidence that many groups visited our lands in ancient times, Japanese whalers do not appear to be among them.

4) Whale meat is available for sale in Japan. Spare the 'using the whole buffalo' argument - if you sell the product, you are using it commercially.

5) As for other endangered species (such as tuna): pointing the finger at us is a bit of a stretch. See http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/22/news/tuna.php.

Yes, our record is far from clear when it comes to conservation. And yes, there probably are more important issues to consider in this day and age. But it doesn't change the fact that the Japanese people lie, come into Australian waters and hunt whales for no apparent purpose. This is not a cultural necessity. It is not a scientific necessity, either. We aren't rednecks for being concerned about it - we are merely doing the right thing for a change.

I would certainly agree that many of whaling's loudest opponents show no considered thought regarding their position. More often than not, anti-whaling protestors give defensive responses when quizzed about their consumption of battery hens or their virtual silence regarding the live export trade. My question has always been this: why are whales' lives more important than hens' lives or sheeps' lives? Of course the standard reply is "Hens and sheep aren't endangered species and they're bred for consumption purposes". This raises some pressing questions:
1. Should we only refrain from killing an animal if it belongs to an endangered species? If so, does this mean there is no intrinsic value attached to individual lives?
2. If indeed there is no intrinsic value in an individual life and our only concern should be to protect endangered species, why don't we breed humans for consumption? Humans certainly aren't an endangered species.
3. If we are concerned about the cruelty of whale slaughter methods, why no en masse public hysteria about the inhumane livestock conditions of pigs or hens? Is it all about the majestic beauty of whales as opposed to the mundane everydayness of cows and pigs? Is this not the ultimate superficiality?
4. If we're concerned about the environmental impact of whaling, what about the environmental impact of rearing livestock for human consumption? Why focus on one but not the other?

Of course my point in all of this is that many of the anti-whaling crusaders are hopelessly inconsistent in their viewpoints. It's very much a case of latching on to a cause in the midst of an otherwise ill-considered moral compass. Don't get me wrong - I certainly agree with the view that whaling is horrific. But how can I rant and rave about Japanese whalers without giving due attention to the horrific maltreatment of animals in my own backyard? I realise some anti-whaling protestors are fully cognisant of all these issues and behave accordingly, but to the bulk of anti-whaling protestors, I say it's time for some major reflection about the ethics associated with your next bacon roll.

According to a tele program watched recently the market for whale meat is poor and promotion is the reason for the markets existence.
The excess meat is exported.
In my opinion there is little defence for this market and the protesters are right this time.
fluff