Conservation

HUNT WITH CAMERAS - NOT HARPOONS

urges Dr Horace Dobbs Honorary Director
International Dolphin Watch

HELP US TO PUT AN END TO WHALING

GREENPEACE DEFENDING OUR OCEANS

http://oceans.greenpeace.org

Icelandic Fisheries Ministry issues permit to kill endangered fin whales!

Iceland resumes commercial whaling!

17 October 2006

In Iceland, the whale watching industry contributes more to the national economy than commercial whaling did before it was put on hold in the '80s. Yet now, after 17 years, Iceland has officially resumed commercial whaling.

Today, the Icelandic Fisheries Ministry issued a permit to hunt 39 whales for commercial purposes. Nine of these are endangered fin whales - putting to lie claims that the hunt is sustainable.

The old Icelandic whale processing factory is also reportedly being

Archive photo: Hvalfjörður whaling station in Iceland. Seagulls feeding on the carcass of a fin whale

put back into service.

Prior to today, Norway was the only country openly conducting commercial whaling. Japan conducts a large yearly hunt using the pretence of "scientific whaling" to keep its industry alive. Since 2003, Iceland has also engaged in so called "scientific whaling". In both cases the meat is sold, mostly as a luxury food.

Update Saturday, 21 October 2006
A lone Icelandic whale hunter licensed to kill 39 whales made his first kill today: an endangered Fin whale.

"There is no economic or scientific justification for commercial whaling.The fact that the first kill was an endangered whale makes a nonsense of claims that the hunt is sustainable," says our campaigner John Frizell. "Iceland has no market for whale meat internationally and almost none domestically. This hunt is no more than pointless posturing, which achieves nothing except the further depletion of an endangered species,"he added.

In addition to the Iceland hunt, next month the Japanese whaling fleet will sail to Southern Ocean, with plans to kill nearly 1,000 whales - including endangered Fin whales. Japan has announced plans to begin hunting humpbacks in future as well.

The question of why?
Kristjan Loftsson, managing director of the Icelandic whaling company, is said to be "pleased" about receiving the hunt permit. But the question remains: why kill whales? Why try to revive a dying industry with a long history of deception and mismanagement?

There is a glut of unwanted meat in Iceland, Norway and Japan. In Iceland, they haven't even sold the meat from earlier "scientific" hunts. There simply is not much of a market for the stuff.

A Gallup poll, commissioned by IFAW and released last month, found that, "Only 1.1 percent of Icelanders eat whale meat once a week or more, while 82.4 percent of 16 to 24-year-olds never eat whale meat." Not very optimistic numbers for a business venture.

Whale watching and how you can help
Iceland has a choice. Most Icelanders are environmentally conscious, and in favour of using marine resources in a way that preserves them for future generations. Its whale watching industry is known around the world, and brings in more revenue than whaling possibly could. Yet, the Fisheries Ministry has done a favour for a very small interest group, and granted a permit for commercial whaling.

This permit should be revoked. You can help by signing the Icelandic pledge. Tens of thousands of people have pledged to consider visiting Iceland as tourists and whale watchers, but only AFTER the whale killin

Iceland Whales Pledge

“I would seriously consider taking a vacation in Iceland rather than somewhere else if the Government of Iceland stopped whaling. I would be willing to receive an email about the options available for Icelandic tourism, an email that would be sent to me if the Government of Iceland ends its whaling program.”

Sign the pledge http://oceans.greenpeace.org/en/

If you agree with the statement above, send the message to the Icelandic Ministry of Tourism.
(If you’ve previously taken the pledge, click here to just send the letter.)

86360 people have made the pledge as of today.


	Iceland responds to the request “Please stop whaling”

Thank you for your correspondence concerning Iceland’s policy on whaling.

I wish to assure you that Iceland has no intention of catching any of the endangered species of whales, killed on a large scale by other whaling nations in the past. Iceland’s resumption of sustainable whaling only involves abundant stocks and is linked to Iceland’s overall policy of sustainable utilisation of marine resources.

Several countries catch whales, most of them on a much bigger scale than Iceland. The biggest whaling countries among the members of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) are the United States, Russia, Norway, Japan and Greenland. The whaling operations practiced by all those countries, as well as Iceland, are sustainable and legal and in accordance with the rules of the IWC.

Iceland fully appreciates the need for careful conservation of marine resources. Our economy depends on those resources as marine products constitute around 60% of Iceland’s revenue from exported goods and almost 40% of all Icelandic exported goods and services. Disruption of the ecological balance in Icelandic waters due to overfishing or other reasons could have catastrophic consequences for the livelihood of Icelanders.

As you may know, Iceland was among the first countries in the world to extend its fishery limits to 200 nautical miles in the year 1975, in order to put an end to the uncontrolled fishing around Iceland by trawlers from other countries. Since then Iceland has taken great care in maintaining balanced and sustainable fishing in Icelandic waters by enforcing an effective management system for various fish species including cod, herring and capelin.

Iceland takes pride in its pioneering work in this field, which has been emulated by many countries in the world wishing to avoid unsustainable practices. The annual catch quotas for fishing and whaling are based on recommendations by scientists, who regularly monitor the status of the stocks, thus ensuring that the activity is sustainable.

For a number of years, Iceland has acknowledged the need for scientific research on whales to gain a better understanding of the interaction between the different whale stocks and other marine species and the role of whales in the marine ecosystem. Therefore, Iceland began implementing a research plan on minke whales in 2003. So far, 161 minke whales have been taken and we look forward to the completion of the research plan in 2007 when the sample size of 200 minke whales has been obtained. Whaling quotas will take into account the number of whales that are taken in the implementation of the research plan, ensuring that the total number remains well below sustainable levels.

There are many different whale species and stocks in the world's oceans. Some are in a poor state and in need of protection. However, many whale populations are far from being threatened or endangered. The total stock size of Central North-Atlantic minke whales, for example, is close to 70,000 animals. Of those, around 43,600 live in Icelandic coastal waters. Fin whales in the Central North Atlantic number around 25,800 animals. Both estimates have been agreed by consensus by the Scientific Committees of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the North-Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO).

Iceland’s decision to resume sustainable whaling involves takes of 30 minke whales and nine fin whales, during the current fishing year, which ends on 31 August 2007. This will bring the total catches of minke whales in Icelandic waters during this fishing year to 69, including the minke whales taken in completing the research plan. These takes equal less than 0.2% of the number of minke whales in Icelandic coastal waters, an even smaller fraction of the total stock, and less than 0.04% of fin whales in the Central North Atlantic. Both are considered to be close to pre-exploitation levels and estimated sustainable annual catch levels are 200 and 400 fin and minke whales respectively. As the catch limits now issued are much lower, the catches will not have a significant impact on whale stocks. A responsible management system will ensure that the catch quotas set will not be exceeded. The catches are clearly sustainable and therefore consistent with the principle of sustainable development.

Iceland’s resumption of sustainable whaling is legal under international law. At the time of the re-entry of Iceland into the IWC, Iceland made a reservation with respect to the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling. As a part of that reservation, Iceland committed itself not to authorise commercial whaling before 2006 and thereafter not to authorise such whaling while progress was being made in negotiating the IWC’s Revised Management Scheme (RMS), a management framework for commercial whaling.

At the IWC’s Annual Meeting in 2005, Iceland went on record expressing its regret that no progress was being made in the RMS discussions. At this year’s IWC Annual Meeting, Iceland’s judgement of the situation was reconfirmed as the IWC generally agreed that talks on an RMS had reached an impasse. As a result, Iceland’s reservation has taken effect. Therefore, Iceland is no longer bound by the so-called moratorium on commercial whaling. In this respect, Iceland is in the same position as other IWC members that are not bound by the moratorium.

Iceland was one of the first countries in the world to realize the importance of a conservation approach to whaling. As signs of overexploitation of whales emerged early in the last century, Iceland declared a ban on whaling for large whales around Iceland in 1915. Whaling was not resumed until 1948, except for limited catches 1935-1939. Strict rules and limitations were applied to whaling in Iceland from 1948 to 1985 when all commercial whaling was halted again following a decision by the IWC.

Iceland has been a leading advocate for international cooperation in ensuring sustainable use of living marine resources, including whales. This has been the position taken by Iceland within the IWC, based on the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling from 1946. The stated role of the IWC, according to its founding Convention, is to “provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry”.

I hope that this information will be useful to you in understanding Iceland’s position on sustainable whaling. You may rest assured, that the desire to ensure the conservation of the whale stocks around Iceland and elsewhere is fully shared by the Icelandic Government.

With regards,
Sturla Sigurjónsson
Foreign Policy Advisor


	A response from Dr. Horace Dobbs

Dear Sturla Sigurjonsson

I applaud Iceland's stance on regulating fishing to maintain stocks at a sustainable level.

However the cetaceans are mammals. Many of them have brains that are as large and more highly evolved than those of humans. Furthermore they have had their large brains for millions of years longer than us. There is a connection between us that remains a mystery. Many sensitive people feel it intuitively at a very deep spiritual level and that to deliberately kill whales and dolphins is morally unacceptable.

150 years ago black Africans, largely through ignorance and lack of understanding, were seen as a "Resource" and were shipped half way round the world to become slaves. A few felt this was morally unacceptable and did something about it. Now that we are more enlightened we all accept that they were right.

In Europe we produce more food on the land than we can consume. In Britain farmers are urged to take land out of production as "set aside". The hunting of whales for food is totally unjustifiable. There are absolutely no grounds for the continuation of a "Whaling Industry" to provide food to sustain human life. There are grounds however for us to explore and gain a greater understanding of what it is about whales and dolphins that affects many people so deeply. This will not come about by hunting and killing them. It is my view, therefore, that all whale killing should be stopped forthwith and that we should hunt with a camera, not a harpoon. It has already been shown in many parts of the world that whale watching and swimming with dolphins is more profitable than killing them. Furthermore such activities provide jobs for fishermen that are totally sustainable.

As in the case of slavery it is a question of education and understanding. I therefore urge the Icelandic Government to abandon whale hunting completely and move towards a more harmonious relationship with the whales and dolphins, which have been described as "Man’s Cousins in the Sea".

Sincerely

Dr Horace Dobbs

Honorary Director, International Dolphin Watch
Email: drdobbs@drdobbs.karoo.co.uk

There are many different elements to conservation. Here are some of them and what you can do.

AWARENESS

General observations that detrimental changes are taking place.

CONCERN

Express your concern to the appropriate authorities. Ask them to investigate, but do not be hoodwinked by glib response.

EVALUATION

Try to evaluate the situation.

PUBLICITY

Alert the public and the government to the situation.

EDUCATION

Problems can best be appreciated by those with an understanding of how the different elements of a balanced environment fit together.

RESEARCH

Facts and figures are required to support the need for change.

PROPOSALS

Suggestions are needed to identify specific ways in which problems can be tackled.

LEGISLATION

Laws need to be passed to resolve ecological problems. This almost inevitably requires compromise between conflicting interests.

ENFORCEMENT

Laws are useless unless they are policed and upheld.

VIGILANCE

Constant monitoring is required to be sure that any improvements are maintained, and that any new threats are identified and acted upon.

INTERNET

A world wide alert can be activated where immediate action is required.


	Conservation in Action

Members of International Dolphin Watch and many others came from far and wide to join the BYCATCH ACTION DAY in London on Tuesday 4th September, 2001.

The peaceful protest was organised to draw attention to the devastation caused by pair trawling. This is a method of fishing in which two trawlers steam side by side pulling a gigantic net between them - the front opening of which can be as big as a football field. It is a very effective way of taking vast quantities of shoaling fish, such as bass, out of the sea. Unfortunately, as well as removing the targeted fish, this method of fishing also captures anything else in the sea that is nearby, including feeding dolphins which become part of what is termed the bycatch. The entangled dolphins which are air breathing mammals — not fish - die from asphyxiation and shock. Their bodies are thrown back into the sea. Evidence of this is the hundreds of dolphins, bearing rope marks, that are being washed up off the coast of Britain and France. Thousands more are probably also killed but never seen again.

The protest concluded with the handing in by representatives of different conservation organisations of packets of petitions containing nearly 40,000 signatures at No. 10 Downing Street in London - the home and office of Tony Blair the Prime Minister.

Among those present were Dr Horace Dobbs, Director of IDW and Liz Sanderman and Margaux Dodds (on either side of the policeman) of Marine Connection P.O. Box 2404 London W2 3WG, tel: 0207 4999196 to whom we offer our sincere thanks for organising the protest.


	The Bycatch Action Day

The Bycatch issue is clearly one in which international legislation for a total ban on pair trawling needs to be passed and policed if dolphin populations are to be protected. Britain must take a leading role in bringing this about. The Bycatch Action Day began with a good natured rally outside the offices of DEFRA - Department of Environment and Food and Rural Affairs (formally the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries) at Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1. DEFRA is


	the government body responsible for legislation and regulation of the fishing industry. Documents were handed in presenting evidence of the devastation to the dolphin population caused by pair trawling together with a request that the UK Government follows the many other countries (including USA, Canada and Spain) who already ban pair trawling.


“It was great to have so many young people taking part”, said Horace Dobbs.	“The police were brilliant”, commented Liz Sanderman, pretending to be a dolphin. “They co-operated from the start and could not have been more helpful.” “Hooray for the British Bobby”, said one American visitor, as he collected one of the leaflets handed out to passers-by.





Children taking part in IDW’s Dolphin Education and Research Project were delighted to receive a signed copy of Dilo and the Treasure Hunters from Horace Dobbs as an unexpected reward for making the trip to London. After gathering in Smith Square the parade made its way noisily, like a carnival procession with Liz and Margaux dressed as dolphins, along Parliament Street. A small group were allowed to pass through the gates into Downing Street. They were joined by veteran campaigner Alan Cooper who had earlier made his own one-man protest outside the Canadian Embassy to draw attention to the plight of the dolphins held captive in a shopping mall in Edmonton, Canada. For information contact Cetacean Defence PO Box 78 Shaftesbury, Dorset. cetaceandefence@hotmail.com

		The 4th of September was a special day for stalwart supporter of IDW, Jane Prowse. The Radio Times carried a rave review of the play she wrote and directed for BBC1. “I want my next play to be about dolphins”, she said.


	Campaign File


	All members of International Dolphin Watch receive a CAMPAIGN FILE which contains information on the the problems facing dolphins and what can be done to help.

A typical example of IDW’s ACTION FOR CONSERVATION policy is its ‘Sand Eel Campaign’
Sand eels form a vital link in the food chain. They are an essential food source for other fish and birds. IDW began its campaign to have the amount of sand eels taken in fisheries dramatically reduced and a total ban on industrial fisheries in the North Sea. The campaign was introduced as follows in the October 1994 edition of the IDW journal DOLPHIN.

GREED THAT MUST BE STOPPED

The British Government’s record of lack of concern, or apparent indifference to the needs of other inhabitants of our planet apart from man reached a new level recently when it was announced that it had given a £100,000 grant to Bio Mar, a Danish subsidiary of the Norwegian giant Norsk Hydro, to build a £6 million fish food factory in Grangemouth (see Daily Telegraph 23 Sept 1994). One of the main sources of raw materials for this mammoth plant is to be the humble sand eel which is being removed from the sea in unimaginable quantities - millions of tons - yes, millions of tons - by INDUSTRIAL FISHING - mainly by the Danes. What is happening to this fish meal you may ask? Some of it is used as fertiliser, pig and chicken feed thereby adding even more to the huge mountain of excess food Europe already produces. The surplus is burned as fuel in power stations.



	cartoon by Rico

In other words we are selectively removing a vital link in a food chain that supports millions of sea creatures because in the short term it is cheaper than using equivalent materials from the land.

The result of this monumental abuse of the sea made possible by industrial technology is already becoming apparent. Sea bird population and sea trout stocks are collapsing. No one can predict what the overall effect will be, but common sense indicates that it spells disaster on an unprecedented scale. One obvious group at risk are the dolphins that eat the herrings that eat the sand eels. One of the great wonders of nature that we in Britain are all privileged to have around our coasts is spectacular colonies of sea birds. Even if we don’t see them we all know, deep down, that somehow they add to the richness to our lives.


	TAKING SAND EELS OUT OF THE FOOD CHAIN IS UTTER MADNESS

It is individuals that change the world. Please do what you can. You can start by writing to the Prime Minister, Rt. Hon. Tony Blair, 10 Downing Street, London, informing him of your concern for the marine environment and the manner in which we are treating it - especially with respect to industrial fishing.

With modern methods we are doing more damage in a few years than has been done by all of the past generations of humans who have inhabited our planet.

Beg him to let wisdom and consideration of the long term implications of what we are doing replace greed in the formulation of government policies. Point out, in your own words, that to put at risk our wonderful heritage for short term profiteering is not a policy you support.

Many IDW supporters did write to Downing Street, and the result was a reply from Dr Ryecroft of the Scottish Office, as reported in DOLPHIN June 1995.

Dr Ryecroft felt there had been ‘a degree of misunderstanding’ about the function of the fish food factory which is designed to produce fish pellets for farmed fish - from for example, offal from fish processing, imported from Denmark. There will be no landings of fish at Grangemouth - therefore no encouragement to the UK fleet to participate in industrial fishing.

Dr Ryecroft stressed the UK Govcmment's policy towards industrial fishing remains unchanged taking the lead in December 1993 at the UK fisheries Council securing agreement to a Working Group to study the implications of industrial fishing commenting "…... there is currently no indication that existing levels of sand eel fishing in the North Sea are having a deleterious effect on stock levels. The most recent assessment shows that sand eelstocks are at high levels."

That conclusion depends on how, when and where the assessments are made of course That conclusion depends on how, when and where the assessments are made of course.

It is important for Government to know we are aware and active. Keep up the pressure. If we don’t then there is no driving force.

A typical answer from government. So all was well? Not so as time would tell. In DOLPHIN Nov. 1998, Dr Horace Dobbs wrote:-

Dear Dolphin Friends

International Dolphin Watch has been campaigning against Industrial fishing of sand eels, on the basis that removing millions of tonnes of what is well established as a key link in the food chain, is bound to have an adverse effect on all marine life in the North Sea as well as the sea birds, such as puffins, which we know feed directly on sand eels. You don’t have to be a scientist to accept this - it’s common sense.

For many years Denmark has been operating an unregulated sand eel fishing fleet, mainly in British Waters, with annual catches of millions of tonnes, much of it destined to provide livestock feed for Danish pig farms.

Well it seems that our pleas, together with those of other pressure groups, such as the RSPB, are getting through.

Earlier this year the European Commission set a catch limit of one million tonnes of sand eels, with Denmark allocated 960,000 tonnes and other nations the remaining 40,000 tonnes. I think this limit is too high - but it’s a start.

I have sent Elliot Morley a letter of thanks and congratulations on his achievements on behalf of all IDW members.

I would like to think that this success means the seas are becoming abundant once again. Sadly this is not so. Even when regulations are passed they are often difficult to police and laws are flouted. So we cannot and will not relax our efforts to restore the seas to something of their former richness and diversity.

I thank all of you who have signed and raised signatures for petitions, especially Andy Peters, who has collected thousands off signatures when touring with his magnificent collection of life-size inflatable whales and dolphins on his Whale and Dolphin Roadshows and Schoolshows.

Dr Horace Dobbs
Honorary Director, IDW

The Times (Tuesday April 13 1999) carried an article which reported a proposed seasonal ban on sand eel fishing from April to August from Orkney to Humberside during the bird breeding season. This is as a result of pressure from principally the RSPG (The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) following research which revealed a drop in the kittiwake population which could be attributed to a shortage of sand eels which constitute a major part of their food source.

Today the position is improved, there has been a reduction in the quantities of sand eels taken and a 3 year total ban was imposed in the Scottish area known as Wee Bankie. The year after this ban became effective, we noticed an improvement in the number of sand eels and increase in porpoise and Minke whale activity.
The ban is subject to review in 2003. It is vitally important that the ban is maintained. To ensure that the issue receives the attention it deserves, it must remain high profile and be frequently brouhgt to the attention of politicians who make and influence decisions in the UK and Europe.

The European Union already has in place policies which should prevent the large scale taking of sand eels. E.U. conservation legislation is based on the Habitats Directive, which aims to create a European network of special areas of conservation. Under annex iv all species of cetaceans are designated as species of community interest in need of strict protection. The challenge lies in ensuring that cetaceans really get the protection they are entitled to by Directive. We do not have to struggle to have the plight of cetaceans recognised by the E.U. Commission, it already is. The problem is getting things actually done.

The Common Fisheries Policy is designed to create a balance between the needs of fisheries and fish stocks. The need to reduce pressure on fish is accepted. Member States must designate Special Areas of Conservation and have established conservation and management measures by June 2004.
There are plans to have specific areas or ‘boxes’ with strict control of fishing where there is thought to be a particular danger to the ecosystem. Sand eel fisheries are seen as part of this. The idea is to limit the taking of sand eels for the production of fishmeal and fish oil so that there is more food in the sea for birds, fish and marine mammals.

IDW's position remains quite clear. We will not be satisfied until there is a total ban on the industrial fishing of sand eels. There are alternative foodstuffs available to the poultry and pork farming industries, and they must be encouraged, by legislation if necessary, to leave the sand eels where they are as an important link in the food chain for so many different species.
Our best chance of success is to make politicians continuously aware of the situation.
The IDW campaign against sand eel fishing is therefore still ongoing. If you can help, please click here and print the form. When you have gathered signatures, please send it to an appropriate politician, or to the IDW office.


	In May 2003 issue of DOLPHIN, Dr. Horace Dobbs hit out again as follows in defence of the dolphins involuntarily caught up in the conflict when Britain and the USA declared war on Iraq. He also added a lighter note about Melanie Parker, who plays a keynote role in managing IDW’s Conservation Campaign.


	AT WAR WITH DOLPHINS

When will we learn that killing one another is not the way to resolve our problems?
Dolphins have brains as large as ours, more highly evolved than ours and if current evolutionary theory is correct they have had them for millions of years longer than us. It is my opinion and that of many others, that dolphins have an intelligence equal to ours, but different.
We are still trying to unravel how they use this intelligence, but some aspects are abundantly clear. It has given rise to a lifestyle in the open sea which embodies two of the qualities we humans hold most dear. Firstly, total freedom. Secondly, harmony with our fellows and with nature. To capture dolphins, confine them in aquatic prisons and then train them for warfare is in my view morally indefensible. But that is exactly what the US Navy did in 1959 and their Marine Mammals Systems (MMS) programme is still operational. In March 2003 dolphins were assigned to Explosive Ordinance Disposal Mobile Units (EODMUs) and flown halfway around the world to help clear the mines in the Gulf.




	Mines are laid specifically to prevent advance on land and in the sea. In open warfare, any people, machines or animals that are involved in the detection and clearance of mines are regarded as legitimate targets to be sought out and destroyed. And that includes dolphins. Most of us live in countries in which it’s possible to express freely views such as this and make them known to the politicians we elect to govern us. However, we have to make it abundantly clear to them how we feel and what we want them to do about their policies if we think they are wrong. So dear reader, if like me, you feel it is morally wrong to pervert the naturally playful and friendly nature of dolphins who have always befriended humans despite the abuses we have heaped upon them,


	please make your views known. Write to Heads of State. Tell them you do not want dolphins caught and trained to take part in the barbarity of carnage and destruction we call war.





				MELANIE PARKER The indefatigable Honorary Secretary of IDW expresses her thanks to all the members who sent her get well messages following her back problems. Melanie has made a complete recovery and is now cavorting around again with Jasper the family dog like a five year old - well almost.


	Government Response

International Dolphin Watch 10 Melton Road, North Ferriby, E.Yorks HU14 3ET. England.
Tel: +44 (0)1482 632650 Fax: +44 (0)1482 634914 E-mail: idw@talk21.com