 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||
 |
|||
|
|
ECO'99 Vol LI No. 3
Article Index:
1) Horse .... meat? The eternal con of the whaling game has taken on a new twist in Japan lately. We heard about it yesterday in a press conference held by that renegade (almost) banned NGO, the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society, and the Swiss Coalition for the Protection of Whales. WDCS agents in Japan have been busy buying meat products sold in stores under various labels, the most common being "kujira" (whale). DNA tests were conducted to identify the species. Samples were also sent to reputable Japanese laboratories for toxicology analyses. The work turned out to be a shocking follow up to earlier DNA studies (sponsored by Earthtrust and IFAW) that exposed the sale of meat from endangered whale species. We now know that not only are large quantities of "whale" meat still being sold fraudulently in Japan, but that it is dangerous to the health of those who eat it. Think about the survey numbers for a moment. Over 2,000 tonnes of meat from over 20,000 dolphins, porpoises and small whales are consumed by Japanese people each year. A full 25% of the small cetacean meat identified in the survey was mis-labelled... i.e. what purported to be whale meat was often really dolphin. That wasn't too surprising, because we already knew it was going on, but here's the kicker... over 95% of the samples contained levels of contaminants (DDT, dieldrin, mercury) that exceeded UN safety standards for human consumption. One sample from a striped dolphin sold as "pilot whale" had a mercury level over 200 times that considered safe for humans. The press release at the conference cited "clear evidence that unscrupulous processors and retailers are buying cheap meat from tens of thousands of dolphins and porpoises killed by Japan each year and are selling them to the unsuspecting public advertised as 'whale meat', which the Government promotes to consumers as healthy food." To a country sensitive to environmental contamination issues (such as Minamata's mercury disaster) the WDCS/SCPW findings must come as a bombshell. No longer can Japanese consumers count on what they're told they're buying, but even worse, they now know they're probably buying poison. You'll recall our story (ECO LI No.1) about contaminated whale products being a threat to Arctic indigenous peoples and others whose "traditional" lifestyles have led them to the habit. Faroese women are now told by their government not to eat whale products until they've given birth to all their children, and not to eat whale meat within three months of a planned pregnancy or at all while pregnant. We now have to add Japanese families to the list of consumers at risk and await the health advisory that should be issued as a matter of urgency to Japanese consumers of whale products. We won't hold our breath. A final note... can you believe horse meat being sold as whale in Tokyo for $600 a kilo? Yep. 2) The fine print Those of you who were offended by our front page cartoon yesterday should possibly know that if you look at it carefully you'll see the words "Raeside" and "Victoria Times Colonist". That comment on the Makah whaling issue was not our doing, though we brought it to your attention. Cartoonist Adrian Raeside is a savvy Canadian political commentator, the Times Colonist is the principal source of print news for Victorians. Raeside was glad to share his views with you, in fact he emailed us the file. The point we're trying to make is that there is a huge constituency for whales out there in the real world... people who care deeply or perhaps just know in their hearts that they should. Media polling in the Pacific Northwest following the Makah kill indicate that over 90% of the populace are opposed to the Makah's "ceremonial" action. If you were offended by Raeside's cartoon, perhaps it's worth thinking about how offended that poor "friendly" gray whale must have been when she swam over to the Makah canoe. (See apology p. 2). 3) Still life? We were too busy "working the problem" yesterday to spend much time in the room, but we did pick up a couple of snippets from the Future of the IWC session. First we heard the "Irish" proposal had so many proven holes it was bound to sink at any moment; then we heard that there was "still life in the old cow." Apparently Japan had offered to talk seriously. Is this a change? We've nothing to say against female bovines, we do have a suggestion. If you want to know whether its still breathing, try nudging it. If it falls over, it's probably dead. 4) Apology The current editors of Eco apologize for any offense caused by the Victoria Times Columnist cartoon we ran in Eco #2. Our intention was to illustrate the overwhelming opposition to Makah whaling in North America by publishing the expression of the oldest, most widely read and mainstream newspaper in Victoria, British Columbia. The criticism from our friends and colleagues has prompted us to look carefully at our purpose here. Our desire is to produce an accurate, incisive and humorous daily that prompts discussion and articulates the case for the preservation of cetaceans. We succeed when we convince readers of the integrity of our position. The trick is to balance keeping old friends and enlisting new ones to the struggle, and yet tell often difficult truths. The tenor of this IWC meeting was partly set by the Makah killing just last week, their insistence that they had the support of the International Whaling Commision, and the apparent acquiescence of the Commission to that falsehood. We will continue to address this issue, but our objection is to the killing of the whale, not to the Makah people. The overarching tragedy is the splitting of the two most powerful allies of the Earth's greater community: the First Nations and those who work to protect the environment. All of us need to put effort into healing this rift. 5) Strike two The unholy Clinton/Gore U.S. Administration revealed its God of Free Trade stripes early on when it refused to impose economic sanctions against Japan and Norway for defying the IWC's ban on commercial whaling. The sacrificial altar has become bloodier by the year as fear recedes and the pirates' confidence grows. This year, Japan and Norway will reap record post moratorium harvests of death in the Antarctic "Sanctuary", the North Pacific and North Atlantic... certain of not even a slap on the wrist. America the brave. Recently, the U.S. Administration has come up with a new idea to kick start a dirty (profitable) old business... a novel interpretation of the science of catching tuna by terrorising dolphins. According to an April 29 ruling by president Clinton's Secretary of Commerce, the deadly nets which killed 7 million dolphins over four decades in the Eastern Tropical Pacific (ETP) tuna fishery do NOT adversely impact dolphins, at least not "significantly". This must have been startling news to scientists of the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service who had told Congress that ETP dolphin populations weren't recovering despite the low "kill reports" (body counts) of Mexico, Venezuela, and other tuna fishing nations. Even more wierdly, several enviros (Greenpeace U.S.A., Center for Marine Conservation, World Wide Fund for Nature U.S.A.) announced their support. Their reasoning was vague to say the least. Perhaps the testimony before Congress of CMC's Nina Young helped understanding when she revealed that CMC received grants totalling $2 million in 1997 from the Clinton Administration. Could this grovelling have been a wooing of the esteem of the U.S. Commander in Chief? The immediate effect of the bizarre decision is to gut standards for American "dolphin safe" tuna. Tuna from dolphin-killing nations can now be labelled "dolphin safe" even if dolphins were chased, harassed, injured or even killed... as long as an on-board observer is willing to claim no dolphins died. Sounds to us like there'll be no need to advertise for observers, they'll be lining up. Free trade, not dolphin safety, is the lurking premise behind this political sell-out. Fortunately for dolphins, the major U.S. tuna processors (StarKist, Bumble Bee, Chicken of the Sea) have declared continuing support for true "dolphin safe" standards regardless. Since these companies comprise 90% of the U.S. canned tuna market, "dolphin deadly" tuna is unlikely to find shelf space in U.S. grocery stores soon. Equally fortunately, some U.S. enviros are still willing to stand up and fight for dolphins. Expect them to file a lawsuit that will return sanity to "dolphin safe" standards. ETP dolphins may be down, but thanks to their true defenders, they're not out. You may be wondering, if this was strike two, what was strike one? That happened the day the Dolphin Death Act ball whizzed by Greenpeace USA, closely followed by a hound baying "woof woof". 6) Humour at last The discussion on the health effects of consuming small cetaceans went along predictably enough until Japan complained that only negative effects were being listed. What about the positive side to eating whale meat? asked Japan, pointing out that unsaturated fats contained in whales improve blood circulation and make the brain work better - though you can't actually go beyond your given brain size. Chairman Canny quickly seized the moment, commenting "From my observations, it also seems to lubricate the tongue." The house broke up. Thank you, Michael! 7) Alan Macnow speaks Those of you who knew Alan in his previous incarnation will remember the way he used to skulk around the edges of meetings, huddling in corners, speaking in whispers. You'll also have noticed his new bravado, and the way he casually wields his influence and reveals his agenda... in Monaco, you may recall, he was holding court. An (un)wise (ab)user to the core, and the proud owner of fabulous Caribbean property, Alan easily reconciles planet side reality with the words he speaks ever more publicly these days. Here are a few samples that are direct quotes from his recent ramblings: "If the IWC allows commercial whaling to resume, whale populations can never again be depleted." "Caribbean states at the IWC always vote in support of Scientific Committee recommendations and the provisions of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. So does Japan." "In 1994, the anti-whaling groups recruited Austria into the IWC to vote for a whale sanctuary in the waters off Antarctica and this year Italy was brought into the IWC to help the anti-whaling cause." "IWC members are often exposed to both coercion and intimidation from the anti-whaling advocates to force them to vote for anti-whaling measures." "Whale watching is a growing activity and should be encouraged, but there is really no reason why it cannot co-exist with whaling." Huh? 8) Canada out to wreck whale meat ban Documents obtained by the Humane Society of Canada under the Federal Access to Information Act clearly show that Canada is working to wreck the international ban on the trade in whale meat by bringing CITES and IWC into direct conflict with each other. Inquiring minds want to know:
The Canadian Observer to this meeting has first-hand knowledge of these matters because he is specifically mentioned in the documents and he actually voted on behalf of Canada at the last CITES meeting in favor of a resolution that would bring the IWC and CITES inot conflict. Just one more small point. A study released last month by the Government of Canada showed that 95% of Canadians support the protection of widlife. 9) Whose future? In their attempt to gaze deeply at commercial whaling crystal balls, the Commissioners' fortune tellers are missing the point. It is not the future of the IWC that's the real concern. Sure, stale coffee, boring interventions and attempts at secret ballots do take a toll on the legitimate functioning of the of the International Whaling Commission. However, boredom or denunciations of democracy aren't the primary threats that need the attention of member countries. Gaze deeper dear Commisioners. The all-important agenda before us isn't the future of the IWC but the future of whales. After centuries of exploitation, under-reporting, blatant infractions, and non-existent enforcement, the Commission now appears committed to sidestepping into the resumption of commercial whaling. Regardless of whether the issue is high-seas whaling or coastal commercial whaling on migratory species, the IWC must refocus its attention on the future of whales threatened for the regretable benefit of just two whaling nations. Our concern must be the future of whales, not the short term financial interests of Norwegian and Japanese whalers. Back to Eco Main Page. |
The USA's oldest and original Greenpeace, proudly unaffiliated with Greenpeace USA