(from "Kujira to Inbou" (Whales and Plots), by Yoshito Umezaki, 1986)
Note:
Remarks starting with an "*" are mine.
The first on the list is Sidney J. Holt. He is British, and had been at the IWC since the 1950s when he worked for FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN). At the 1972 meeting of the IWC, he opposed the moratorium proposal, but soon he became the science advisor for an anti-whaling organization, 'Project Jonah'. Since he left FAO, he's been attending IWC meetings as a delegate from UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), Malta, Seychelles, and has became a charismatic anti-whaling leader.(*1)
The next on the list is Douglas G. Chapman (USA). When the US government proposed the moratorium at the 1972 meeting of the IWC, he was chairman of the Scientific Committee and brought the discussion to the conclusion of unanimous rejection of the proposal in the Scientific Committee. Soon after, Chapman moved from being a professor at Washington University to being chairman of the US Marine Mammal Commission. As I described earlier, while other scientists - such as D.W. Rice and J.L. McHugh were then excluded from the US delegation - only Chapman could remain, since he changed his position on whaling to anti-whaling. Perhaps he had to change the position to keep his status.
The combination of Holt and Chapman exploded the established theories on whales, and led whaling toward a reduction in scope. It is mostly due to their activities that the Scientific Committee got to be called the 'Unscientific Committee'.
Jumping about a bit in time, the IWC established a Committee of Three Scientists in 1961 to investigate how to regulate the Antarctic whaling. The members were Holt, Chapman, and Kay Radway Allen (New Zealand). In 1963, the Committee of Three Scientists recommended the protection of the blue whale, abolishing the setting of catch limits by BWU (Blue Whale Unit). This recommendation was epoch-making since it stopped the history of the over-exploitation of whales. However, what was unfortunate for whaling nations was that these three scientists did not have knowledge of whales or whaling. They had no experience in the biological study of whales, nor had they ever been on board whaling ships.
After the meeting at La Jolla, these 'paper doctors' of whales asked too much of pure whale scientists using 'uncertainty', and attacked the other scientists' views. From so many examples of spoiling of science by Holt and Chapman, let me describe some.
The biggest one was to forcibly change the MSY (Maximum Sustainable Yield) Level up to 60% - to damage to factory ship whaling - at the La Jolla meeting, At that time it was established theory that the MSY Level was about 50% of the initial stock population, but Holt strongly insisted, "It should be set to 60% to take safety into account". The change in MSY Level has very serious effects. By changing the level, some whale stocks became classified as Protection Stock, and no catch is allowed.
Manipulation of the MSY Level by Holt lasted beyond the turning of the 80% of fin whales in the Antarctic and fin and sei whales in the North Pacific into Protection Stock at the 1975 meeting of the IWC. Later, with no convincing scientific basis, the MSY Level was changed to 70% to take safety into account, and it was raised to 90% in the case of female sperm whales. However, manipulation of the MSY Level was their last resort. There are many other ways to change the classification of a whale stock to a more severe one. One effective way, which everyone might think of, is to underestimate the current stock population.
To estimate the current stock population, the fluctuations of stock population are calculated using a model which uses some negative factors - such as the number of years the hunt lasted, the total number of exploited whales, natural mortality rate - and positive factors - such as the number of newborn whales (the number of whales which are mature enough to be exploited). However, since these data are not enough for precise estimation, other characteristic factors such as age-class structure, age of sexual maturity, and pregnancy rate are also used. However, one can cavil at these characteristics factors as much as he/she wants, and this is where 'paper doctors' use their skill.
1 The following texts from a letter written by S. Holt to leaders
of anti-whaling movement is cited in the epilogue of Mr Umezaki's book.
We must make an effort to influence the U.N. organizations so that they
will declare that whales are holy and sacred animals.
Such proclamation by U.N. organizations will not in itself prevent the
recommencement of whaling.
However, it will no doubt encourage private organizations that are working
to prevent it."
"Our objective is to present the following points as reasons why whaling
should not be recommended by 1990: (1) depleted whale stock will probably
never return to adequate levels, (2) it is not practical to manage whales
while hunting them, (3) whales are a special existence.
_