(from "Chair's Report of the 54th Annual Meeting")

In making his report, the Working Group Chair indicated that prior to discussions on substantive issues, Japan had made a statement summarising its views on how whale killing methods and welfare issues is being dealt with by the Commission. Japan considered that the discussions have become increasingly dissociated from science such that it does not see merit in submitting its detailed data on these matters to IWC, preferring to report its results to appropriate academic fora. It would, however continue its research on killing methods and its efforts to reduce time to death.

8.1.1 Data on whales killed
The Working Group Chair reported that data on whales killed had been provided on a voluntary basis by Denmark, the Russian Federation, Norway, Japan and the USA in reference to Resolution 1999-1.

Denmark had provided detailed information regarding the 2001 Greenland hunt of minke whales, with statistics on most parameters. The Russian Federation had submitted information on the 2001 Chukotka hunt and drew attention to the improved training of the hunters and the expertise provided by other nations.

Norway had reported on the 2001 traditional minke whale hunt in which a new penthrite grenade, Whalegrenade-99 has been used. Results from this hunt had shown that instantaneous death was achieved in over 79% of the animals, that no whales had escaped wounded and that average time to death was 145 seconds. Japan had given a brief account of the 2000/2001 and 2001/2002 JARPA programme, emphasising again that gathering data on whales killed under Special Permit fell outside the competence of the Working Group. In the 2001/2002 JARPA, 200 Norwegian Whalegrenade-99 were used for the second year to compare with Japanese grenades. A large number of countries had urged Japan to provide in the future and on a voluntary basis, more information in line with that provided by Norway and Denmark.

The USA had stated that lawsuits had prevented a whale hunt by the Makah in 2001 but that when the tribe resumes the hunt it would do so in a traditional manner with modifications to traditional techniques to improve the humaneness of the hunt. The USA had also reported on the 2001 Alaskan Eskimo bowhead hunt in which 49 bowheads were landed with 26 being struck and lost. All whales were taken using the traditional hand-thrown darting gun harpoon, the majority firing the traditional black powder projectile, but with 6 using the penthrite projectile that the Alaskan Eskimo Whaling Commission (AEWC) had been working to develop with Norway. The hunt had taken place mostly using small skin boats propelled by paddles under dangerous circumstances. The USA had reported that the difficult nature of the hunt makes it impossible to estimate the time to death with the same accuracy as in other whaling operations.

The Working Group Chair reported that the absence of data from St. Vincent and The Grenadines had been noted by several countries. He added that a statement had been provided to the Group by St. Vincent and The Grenadines to the effect that although it provides information on its hunt to the Scientific Committee via its annual Progress Report, it does not recognise the competence of IWC in whale killing methods and therefore does not attend the Working Group.

8.1.2 Information on improving the humaneness of whaling operations
The Working Group Chair informed the meeting that Denmark had reported on improvements on whale hunting methods in Greenland and in particular on the accuracy of delivery of the penthrite grenade harpoon and the effectiveness of secondary killing methods.

The Russian Federation had reported that its focus was on training the hunters, emphasising continued improvements in the efficiency of the hunt, with a 24% reduction in time to death in 2001 compared to 2000, a 15% reduction in the number of bullets and a 14% reduction in the number of darting gun projectiles used. The Russian Federation had, however, expressed concern about putting the lives of hunters at risk when attempting further reductions in times to death that should be viewed in the context of the nature of the hunt. It had indicated that further progress would likely depend on the ongoing collaboration with the AEWC and on availability of technical material and assistance. The Working Group Chair reported that a number of delegations had commended the Russian Federation on its improved hunt.

Norway had reported on the co-operative work taking place among its authorities, scientists and hunters and that Norwegian specialists have been giving lectures on weapons, ballistics and hunter safety through seminars arranged by the AEWC and NAMMCO (North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission).

Japan had reported briefly that its testing of the new grenade has been continuing in co-operation with Norway.

The USA had reported on the status of the AEWC Weapons Improvement Program to develop a method to improve the humaneness of the black powder projectile.

8.1.3 Plans for a workshop on whale killing methods
The Working Group Chair informed the meeting on plans for a workshop in 2003 on whale killing methods. He noted that Norway had proposed: (1) Dr. Sam Ridgway of UC Veterinary Medical Center of San Diego, USA as a candidate for workshop Chair; and (2) that issues to be addressed include (i) patho-physiological changes in the central nervous system and other vital organs of whales caused by intra body detonation of the penthrite grenade, (ii) the effect of large calibre round nosed bullets used for euthanasia (secondary weapons) in minke whales, and (iii) hunter safety. Norway had also stressed that participating experts should be able to contribute to the workshop without a restricted mandate and that comparative data from the hunt of other wild mammals and from the slaughter of domestic animals should be included. An ad hoc task force was constituted to further consolidate the workshop agenda (see Appendix 5 of Annex D) and to suggest a venue and time. It was proposed that a three-day workshop be held during IWC/55 in Berlin beginning the day after the end of the Scientific Committee meeting.

8.1.4 Other
The Working Group Chair noted that New Zealand had given a short presentation of a paper on possible adverse effects of the protracted pursuit of whales by whaling vessels and that this had been criticised in terms of the scientific quality of the document by some and received with gratitude by others. The Working Group Chair had expressed the view that in the future, papers of substantial scientific content should be presented to the Group only following proper international peer review or else be referred to a workshop.

The Chair also reported that the UK had posed several questions concerning methods used by Japan to kill small cetaceans in Japanese coastal waters. Japan had indicated that it would not answer such questions in the context of IWC but that it was prepared to do so as it deems appropriate on a bilateral basis. Denmark had responded similarly to a question regarding the Faroese pilot whale hunt.

The UK had expressed concern over the high increase in bycatch of whales in Japanese fisheries since changes in domestic legislation and had requested information on killing methods, times to death, regulations, observations and guidance to fishermen involved. Japan had responded that bycatch is outside the terms of reference for the Working Group but that it had provided the information to the Scientific Committee on a voluntary basis. Both positions had been supported by a number of countries.

8.2 Commission discussions and action arising
In the Commission, Japan re-iterated the statement it had made in the Working Group and reported by the Working Group's Chair. The Chair of the Commission expressed his appreciation of the voluntary submission of data by Japan. While the UK recognised the value of the information provided by Japan, it expressed the hope that Japan and other countries not submitting data covering all the whales and some small cetaceans killed, would be prepared to provide information to the proposed workshop so that it could have the widest possible coverage.

The Commission noted the Working Group's report and accepted its recommendations for a workshop associated with IWC/55 next year. It agreed that a small committee comprising Norway, Denmark, Germany and New Zealand, assisted by the Secretariat, would be responsible for organising the workshop.

NAMMCO informed the Commission of the outcome of a workshop it organised in November last year on 'Marine Mammals: Weapons, Ammunition and Ballistics'. The workshop had involved hunters, scientists, administrators from the four NAMMCO member countries and participants from Sweden and Canada. The context of the workshop was the need to discuss the effect of various ammunitions, weapon types and where to aim in the killing of whales and seals, and the safety precautions needed when introducing new technologies. Taking account of the dangerous nature of marine mammal hunting using explosives and lethal weapons often under extreme weather conditions, the workshop was clear that the introduction of new methods should not compromise hunter safety. The workshop prepared a set of recommendations and conclusions, including a recommendation for more controlled and standardised studies of the effect of weapons and ammunition on species hunted. It also thought it useful to consider harmonising ammunition and weapon types for each species while giving due consideration to variations in hunting conditions in different NAMMCO member countries. The workshop agreed that it is imperative to involve and utilise the experience of hunters together with scientific studies to support any harmonisation efforts.

_