Too many people for sure - and such a savage spieces.

I don't know what the answer is.

I do remember, however, a school excursion to a whaling station when I was seven. Mum had given me a hankerchief sprinkled in perfume to mask the stench of the flensing deck....and the great carcass of a majestic dead whale lay dead - and all these little humans were buzzing around it hacking pieces off....and i walked over to the water and it wasn't the right colour. It resembled a sea of blood.

Emotive, I know - and unforgettable : (

Lexi and Poirot,
According to paul, the japs may now prefer beef to whale meat so that is good news for both whales and maybe our northern cattlemen.

However krill has been harvested by Japan and Russia, with Russia now discontinued. China entered last year and it is yet to be seen if they will expand their harvest.

As the world population grows, we will be looking closely at all aspects of food supply. Harvesting of Krill and seaweed may be options. Krill may be used for both human consumption and as a food for farmed fish. Seaweed may be taste altered for many uses.

Lexi, you are right, this may have a far more detrimental effect on whales than the whaling of a few countries now.

Let us look at the family planning programmes of both Iran and Thailand and expand on that to other countries of high birthrates and famine susseptable areas so as to restrain world population growth.

It has got me beat why governments and the UN do not do more in relation to family planning. I was surprized at how effective government sponsored programmes are.

Dear Banjo,

1) Family planning is an essential element in population limitation
but according to the experts it's not sufficient in itself.

2) Antinatalism - this strategy involves public policies
intended to discourage births. These policies always
include educational programs aimed at changing social values
and attitudes about family size. The outstanding example
of this strategy is I guess - China's. There is an
official limit of two children per family, but parents
are urged to have only one. Contraception, abortion,
and sterilisation are freely available and local officials
check on families to make sure they don't exceed their
limit. Couples who have only one child receive
financial benefits and preferential treatment in jobs and
housing. Those who have more than two are regarded as
antisocial deviants. No small penalty in a highly
conformist society.

3) Economic improvements - Many of the less developed nations
don't have the means to achieve the rapid economic growth
necessary to raise living standards to the appropriate
level. There is evidence however that a different kind of
economic reform might bring about a lower birth rate.

A fairer distribution of the society's resources.
In other words if people are allowed to enjoy such basics
of life as food, shelter, clothing, health care, education
(especially for women) and a sense that things will get
better in the future, then they tend to voluntarily limit
the size of their families.

The family-planning efforts of many less developed nations,
fail, it seems, because the resources of these societies
are unfairly shared. Typically a tiny elite enjoys a
disproportinate share (and its birth rate drops) but
the mass of the people remain in hopeless poverty (and
maintain high birth rates).

Policies that focus on a sharing of resources rather than
exclusively on economic development that may benefit only
a minorty may be a promising way to reduce global
population growth.

The Japanese are not so crass that they would kill whales for economic considerations, Its all done in the name of "scientific research", can't wait to read the results of the "scientific research". Possibly the Japaneses are trying to prove that if you harpoon a whale, it most likely dies.

I've just come across the following link
which may add some more thoughts to this
discussion:

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4112596.html

Lexi,
I do not know who the 'experts' are that have doubts about the effectiveness of government sponsored family planning.

Both Iran and Thailand have had great success with their programmes, lowering their birthrates from about 6.5 per woman to about 1.7 per woman. Both these countries did it wholeheartedly, with education in all aspects of family planning and providing the means. Apparently couples were able to choose the methods that best suited their need. It was purely by education and the provission of the means.

You can google family planning in Iran and Thailand and get numberous websites and papers outlining their programmes. One particular site I found interesting was this one.

http://opinion.inquirer.net/9489/family-planning-in-thailand-ph

It compares the difference between Thailand and the Phillipines who were similar in population and economies. Thailand sponsored family planning and Phillipines has not. Now there is a vast difference in the populations and the economies.

I certainly am no expert in this but my interest was arroused when I first saw an article about Iran. To me it graphicly illustrated that family planning does work if sponsored strongly by governments.

To me it dispelled the need for draconian methods to reduce birthrates, or at least gave hope that family planning should be tried, so I have endeavoured to inform others when ever I get the opportunity.

If you have any links to the experts that doubt the effectiveness I would like to see what they say.

It really does distress me to see pictures of undernourished kids when I know it can be avoided by education in family planning. Not to mention the deaths and problems young undeveloped girls have from giving birth too young.

I would be interested in your comments when you have researched looked at Iran and Thailand programmes.

http://opinion.inquirer.net/9489/family-planning-in-thailand-ph