(from "Chair's Report of the 55th Annual Meeting")

13.1 Cetacean-fisheries interactions
13.1.1 Report of the Scientific Committee
The Committee has begun to look at the issues surrounding fisheries and cetaceans. The main long-term objective of the Committee on this topic is to answer the question 'how are changes in abundance of cetaceans likely to be linked (in the short- and long-term) to changes in fishery catches?' A Workshop to address modelling-related issues related to the interactions between cetaceans and fisheries was held in July 2002. Its aim was to evaluate existing modelling approaches, including identifying their constraints and data requirements, in order to identify those approaches most likely to answer the above question. The Workshop reviewed all the available major modelling approaches that deal with top predators and multi-species fisheries interactions.

The Workshop concluded that despite recent advances, most multi-species models are still in the development phase. It therefore agreed that no single approach could be recommended at this stage to provide reliable information of value to consideration of cetacean dynamics in an ecosystem context. However, this does not necessarily rule out the possibility that useful inferences might be drawn if a number of different modelling approaches yield qualitatively similar results. The Workshop also agreed that despite these difficulties, the consideration of ecosystem interactions between fish stocks and cetaceans is a potentially important research topic.

The Committee endorsed the Workshop conclusion that for no system at present are we in the position, in terms of data availability and model development, to provide quantitative management advice on the impact of cetaceans on fisheries, or of fisheries on cetaceans. However, this does not rule out the possibility of providing qualitative advice if a number of different approaches yield qualitatively similar results. It also endorsed the conclusion that consideration of ecosystem interactions between fish stocks and cetaceans is a potentially important research topic in a general sense; however, there was disagreement as to whether further pursuit of this matter was likely to be helpful to the Committee in providing advice to the Commission regarding the management of whale populations.

13.1.2 Commission discussions and action arising
The USA noted that it had been pleased to host the workshop, thanked the Scientific Committee for its work on this topic and encouraged further discussions to promote the understanding of this issue. The USA remarked that while some countries argue that whale numbers must be reduced to protect commercial fish stocks, the USA considered that the primary reason for declining fish stocks is over-fishing. New Zealand, Australia and Monaco expressed similar views. New Zealand referred to a recent article in the journal Nature charting the decline in the world's fisheries over the past 50 years. The article reported, inter alia, that industrialised fisheries typically reduce biomass of targeted species by 80% within 15 years of exploitation and that since 1950, some 90% of the world's large tuna has been removed by pelagic long-liners. New Zealand considered this evidence to be at odds with Japan's assertions that whales are responsible for the decline of tuna resources in the South Pacific. Referring to a paper submitted to the workshop by Australian scientists, Australia believed that the modelling of ecosystems required a complexity that took the issue far beyond the 'whales eat fish' argument. Monaco considered that whales should not be used as the scapegoat of irresponsible fisheries. It encouraged developing countries to direct their anger at industrial fishery operations. The UK expressed its regret that Japan had been unable to attend the IWC workshop given the importance it attaches to this issue.

Norway, Japan and Iceland spoke of the importance of research into cetacean-fisheries interactions. Norway noted that it, Iceland and others are performing research in this area but that this would probably be under the auspices of NAMMCO rather than IWC. Japan believed that this issue is one of the most important issues to be addressed by IWC but contested that it had ever stated that whales were entirely responsible for declines in fisheries. Rather it considered the three main reasons to be over-exploitation, habitat degradation and marine mammals. It noted that since Resolution 2001-9²⁵ on interactions between whales and fish stocks was adopted by the Commission at the 2001 Annual Meeting, FAO and a number of regional fisheries organisations had made similar commitments to work in this area. It further recalled that the implementation of an ecosystem approach to fisheries management is one of the goals of the Johannesburg Plan adopted at the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development. Japan indicated that this issue continues to be a priority for Japan and that it would continue its research and report the results to the Scientific Committee. Iceland agreed with earlier statements that the main reason for the decline in fish stocks is over-fishing, not whales, but believed that the role whales play in the marine ecosystem should be recognised and not disregarded. It stressed that problems in fisheries are the result of bad management. Iceland believed that referring to declines in fisheries as a global problem is an oversimplification as there are some well-managed fisheries. Germany appreciated Iceland's statement regarding over-fishing but questioned whether this is sufficient reason to kill whales.

Responding to a remark from Japan, Australia considered that the FAO and regional fishery bodies were being slightly overwhelmed by the issue of cetacean/fishery interactions - an issue that was spilling-over from the debate within IWC. The focus of the work of these bodies is on fisheries management not whales.

The representative from NAMMCO informed the meeting about its ongoing work on marine mammal-fisheries interactions, noting that it welcomed co-operation with others.

The Commission noted the Scientific Committee's report and endorsed its recommendations.

13.2 High latitude climate change effects on cetaceans
13.2.1 Report of the Scientific Committee
SPECIAL SESSION ON SOUTHERN OCEAN CLIMATE CHANGE AND CETACEANS
The Committee held a special session on Southern Ocean climate change and cetaceans. In particular, it considered two presentations, one summarising work on krill, its physical environment, competitors and predators, and emphasised major findings and current hypotheses. The other focussed on the US SO-GLOBEC programme, and described the integrated study of physical and biological oceanography, krill and krill predators, noting IWC collaboration with respect to cetaceans. The implications of this work (much of which occurs outside the normal timing of Antarctic cetacean research) for other aspects of the IWC's work (e.g. see the Antarctic minke whale section above) was noted.

SO-GLOBEC/CCAMLR
The Committee reviewed a number of papers covering the ongoing collaboration with SO-GLOBEC and CCAMLR. It expressed its strong endorsement of this collaborative work and recommended that this work be continued.

13.2.2 Commission discussions and action arising
The Netherlands supported continuation of the SO-GLOBEC work. No other remarks were made.

The Commission noted the Scientific Committee's report and endorsed its recommendations.

13.3 Habitat-related issues
13.3.1 Report of the Scientific Committee
POLLUTION 2000+
Many analyses have been completed for the bottlenose dolphin sub-project, while for the harbour porpoise sub-project, progress has been made on immunohistochemistry analyses. The Committee noted that the ability to attract additional funding for this project will ultimately determine the products that are completed and the project's success.

The Committee strongly supported this programme and endorsed its continuation.

STATE OF THE CETACEAN ENVIRONMENT REPORT (SOCER)
Following discussions last year, the Committee reviewed the preliminary version of the State of the Cetacean Environment Report; it originated in response to a request from the Commission for such an overview.²⁶ The SOCER is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to provide a brief 'snapshot' of the cetacean environment for the non-specialist reader. The Committee concluded that the process leading to the current SOCER draft (see Annex K of the Committee's report) had been satisfactory and that a useful product had been produced.

ARCTIC ISSUES
The Committee noted that a new research initiative focused on the sub-Arctic is taking form under the GLOBEC organisational umbrella. The new initiative is called Ecosystem Studies of Sub-Arctic Seas (ESSAS) and will provide opportunities for collaborative studies of cetacean ecology (http://www.globec.org).

HABITAT DEGRADATION
Last year, the Committee recommended that: (1) the Commission request information from the Government of Mexico on the specific locations and types of construction comprising the 'Nautical Steps' tourist development; and (2) the Commission request the Government of Mexico to take steps to ensure the maintenance of habitat important to cetaceans. The Committee thanked the Government of Mexico for providing a response (SC/55/O25). After considering the available information, the Committee expressed concern about the potential negative effects of this commercial development on local cetaceans and their habitats. It expressed disappointment that specific information requested last year was not made available in SC/55/O25, and therefore reiterated its request made last year.

The Habitat Degradation Workshop has been under consideration by the Committee for some years²⁷. The workshop proposal was endorsed by the 2001 and 2002 meetings of the Scientific Committee. It was also recognised as important by ACCOBAMS. However, to date, funding has not been made available to conduct the workshop. The Committee reiterated its ongoing support for the workshop and recommended that it be held this year if funds are made available.

ACOUSTIC ISSUES
The Committee spent some time considering noise pollution and cetaceans. It was noted that considerable progress has been made in understanding noise pollution, including the development of tools to quantify exposure levels for individuals and populations. The challenge remains to interpret the biological impact of physiological or behavioural responses to anthropogenic noise exposure.

The Committee expressed concern about the emerging threats to cetaceans from man-made sound, including inter alia deliberate deployment of powerful acoustic sources. Noting the emerging role of the US Marine Mammal Commission (MMC) in addressing these issues, the Committee recommended:

(1)

that the Secretariat contact the US MMC with a request for exchange of information and potentially the development of cooperative research in order to combine the expertise of both bodies;

(2)

that workshops generated under the auspices of the US MMC 'noise programme' should include Scientific Committee representation where appropriate; and

(3)

that appropriate representatives of the US MMC should be invited to attend the next Scientific Committee meeting to discuss progress in this field.

13.3.2 Commission discussions and action arising
The Netherlands supported continuation of POLLUTION 2000+.

Australia expressed concern regarding the level of contaminants with human health implications found in whales killed as part of the JARPNII programme as reported in document IWC/55/23 submitted by Japan. It noted in particular the high levels of mercury and cancer-related PCBs found in North Pacific sperm and minke whales. Endorsing these comments, the UK noted that the Japanese authorities now seem to acknowledge that not only are many sources of whale meat contaminated, but that many cetacean species that find their way onto the Japanese market labelled as whale meat are also highly contaminated. The UK further noted that a veterinary institute in Norway has advised that North Atlantic minke whale blubber contains such high levels of contaminants that consumption should not exceed 10g/week for adults, while pregnant women and children should not consume blubber at all. A recommendation to reduce consumption of minke whale meat had also been made because of mercury levels. Germany and Mexico believed that environmental contamination was one of the issues that should be covered by the new Conservation Committee.

Norway considered the UK's remarks to be misleading in the context given. It acknowledged that marine products contain some mercury and that in certain contexts, these have been a concern for Norwegian health authorities. However, it reported that mercury levels in the red meat of minke whales caught in the North Atlantic is of a similar order of magnitude as that in fish species in the region and lower than in tuna and other fish species. It acknowledged that minke whale blubber had been put on a list of food products that pregnant women should not eat but noted that the same list includes many other fish species and marine products.

Regarding SOCER, Austria drew attention to this year's report, indicating that comments would be welcomed. It reported that the focus of next year's report would be the Pacific Ocean.

Austria, the UK, Italy, Argentina, Mexico and Monaco noted the importance of the proposed habitat degradation workshop and hoped that it could be held. The UK suggested that if funds could not be found this year, then they should be made available next year. Italy noted that the University of Sienna had expressed interest in hosting the workshop and that some funding had already been secured through voluntary contributions. Austria called on Contracting Governments to provide voluntary funding to enable the workshop to go ahead.

The Commission noted the Scientific Committee's report and endorsed its recommendations.

13.4 Reports from Contracting Governments
There were no reports from Contracting Governments on national and regional efforts to monitor and address the impacts of environmental change on cetaceans and other marine mammals.

13.5 Health issues
Commission discussions and action arising
Referring to Resolution 1999-4²⁸ on health effects from the consumption of cetaceans, Monaco requested information on the status of the request to the Scientific Committee made by the Resolution to 'receive, review and collate data on contaminant burdens in cetaceans and forward these as appropriate to the WHO competent national authorities, and to report on this matter to the Commission.'

The Scientific Committee Chair reported that the Committee addressed this issue at its meetings in 2001 and 2002²⁹. He explained that a paper prepared for the Committee on WHO's requirements for submission of data regarding contaminants in food had revealed that the required standards for data quality and control were considerably higher that those typically employed in the fish and wildlife community, given the use to which they are put by WHO. He noted that although the Committee had requested papers to be presented on contaminants, none had been received. He believed that the submission of data by the Scientific Committee to WHO is unlikely, because of their extremely high requirements, but did not consider this a reason for information on contaminant levels in a format more typical of peer-reviewed literature in fisheries and wildlife to not be made available.

Monaco considered the response from the Scientific Committee Chair to be a signal that collaboration between IWC and WHO should be reactivated and strengthened.

²⁵ Ann. Rep. Int. Whaling. Comm. 2001: 58
²⁶ Ann. Rep. Int. Whaling. Comm. 2001: 56-7
²⁷ J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 5 (suppl.): 73.
²⁸ Rep. Int. Whal. Commn 1999:53.
²⁹ Rep. Int. Whal. Commn 2000:41-42 and 2001: 32-33

_