(from "Chairman's Report of the Thirty-Second Annual Meeting")

The Technical Committee agreed to recommend that stocks should be unclassified, and after lengthy discussion including clarification of the Scientific Committee's conclusions, it dealt with two groups of Areas separately. Following the defeat of amendments in each case, it recommended by majority votes the following catch limits:

Area III:	1,178				Area I:	270
Area IV:	2,272				Area II:	858
Area VI:	445				Area V:	745

It also recommended by a majority vote that there should be no 10% allowance between Areas.

Japan regretted the failure of the Scientific Committee to produce a single agreed recommendation. It was pleased to note that all stocks are in a healthy state and larger than previously estimated. This latter information was due in part to the co-operative research programme undertaken in two of the Areas. The uncertainties in three Areas were due to lack of adequate research data.

The USSR commented on the fact that despite increases in the population estimates this year, the recommended catch limits are lower. It sees a need to stabilise the catches and proposed an amendment, seconded by Japan, for the same catch limits as last year, including a 10% allowance between Areas.

This amendment for Areas III, IV and VI was defeated by 6 votes in favour to 16 against, with 2 abstentions. The original proposal for these three Areas then achieved the necessary three-quarters majority, receiving 17 votes for and 4 against, with 3 abstentions. The amendment for continuation of the present catch limits in Areas I, II and V was defeated by 6 votes in favour with 16 against and 2 abstentions. The original proposal recommended by the Technical Committee received 15 votes for and 8 against with 1 abstention, and so it did not obtain a three-quarters majority.

Ultimately the Commission achieved a consensus for these three Areas as follows:

AreaI:

867

AreaII:

1,120

AreaV:

1,190

The total catch permitted is thus 7,072 minke whales and it was agreed that a 5% allowance between Areas would be permitted. The USSR stated that it understood that a mistake was made in setting the catch limits last year, which has now been corrected.

The Commission accepted the recommendation of the Scientific Committee, endorsed by the Technical Committee, for a special meeting on minke whale assessments prior to the next meeting in view of the many problems encountered.

Fin and sei whales
The Commission adopted the Scientific Committee's recommendation, endorsed by the Technical Committee, that stocks in all Areas continue as PS.

Bryde's whales
The Scientific Committee recognised the following stocks:

The Commission adopted the recommendations of the Scientific Committee through the Technical Committee on the following classifications and catch limits:

Peruvian stock
The Scientific Committee recommended either the average of the last five years' catches (359) or a catch limit derived from the North Pacific Bryde's whale model (164). The Technical Committee endorsed the classification as SMS (provisional) and by a majority vote recommended a catch limit of 164.

Peru pointed out that there has been no evidence of a decrease in sightings or catches per unit of effort since 1975, and on being put to the vote the proposal failed to obtain the three-quarters majority required to become effective, receiving 16 votes in favour with 8 against.

Subsequently the Commission reached a consensus to classify this stock as SMS with a catch limit of 264.

Right, blue and humpback whales
The Commission adopted the recommendation of the Scientific Committee through the Technical Committee that all these species should continue to be classified as PS.

Based on a further recommendation from the Scientific Committee endorsed by the Technical Committee, the Commission agreed that the Secretary should write to the government of the Argentine requesting the provision of an analysis of population trends for the Argentine stock of right whales, carried out under a US Marine Mammal Commission research grant.

Killer whales
The Scientific Committee believes that there are probably several stocks in the Antarctic, although there is considerable uncertainty over their identity and abundance. Therefore it recommended classification as IMS, with a zero catch limit. The USSR was asked to continue to provide adequate data for stock assessment.

The USSR stated that its position is unchanged: killer whales belong to small cetaceans which are not regulated by the Commission within the framework of the existing Convention. Thus it believes that the inclusion of killer whales in the number of species regulated by the Commission is legally unjustified.

There followed an extensive debate in Technical Committee involving the factory ship catches during the last season, the ambiguity concerning killer whales in the Schedule provisions, the northern boundary to the Antarctic and implications of coastal state jurisdiction, on which the Argentine reserved its position. The Argentine also reserved its position on small cetaceans.

Finally the Technical Committee agreed to recommend the addition of a new sentence to the Schedule paragraph 9(d) in order to include killer whales in the moratorium on factory ship whaling. This was adopted by the Commission, so that the following wording will be added:

'This moratorium applies to sperm whales, killer whales and baleen whales, excluding minke whales.'

Norway stated its view that this amendment does not cover its catch of killer whales in the North Atlantic carried out by small-type whaling as defined in the Schedule, Section I.

Sperm whales
The Scientific Committee has held a special workshop meeting on sperm whales at which considerable progress in some areas was achieved.

In Division 9 two assessment techniques were employed which both indicated that the male and female stocks are much reduced. The Scientific Committee therefore recommended that they are both classified as PS with zero catch limits.

Chile stated that it wished the IWC to respect the quotas set last year. It has a small industry which is committed to closure in 1982. Peru supported the Chilean position and, whilst recognising the Scientific results, does not believe the decline in stocks is so large as suggested. It too stated that it will stop taking sperm whales in 1982.

There was some discussion over the current Schedule provisions for this stock as given in Table 2 of the Schedule. A proposal that the wording referring to '25% of the 1978 catch' for 1981 should be deleted was defeated by a majority vote in Technical Committee, which therefore made no recommendations on Southern Hemisphere sperm whales.

The Commission however reached a consensus agreement that the reference to the 25% provision should be deleted, which has the effect of setting the catch limit for Division 9 in 1981 at 300.

13.2 North Pacific 1981 Season
The Commission adopted the recommendations of the Scientific Committee endorsed by the Technical Committee as follows:

The Commission noted the large Taiwanese catches of between 500 and 1,000 animals and the USA indicated that this matter should be resolved since it is equivalent to, or more than, the recommended catch limit.

The Commission also supported the recommendation of the Scientific Committee that an expert should be sent to assist in the identification of large whales in Korean catches.

Humpback, Blue, Right & Gray whales (western stock) - PS
It was agreed that the Secretary write to the People's Republic of China for information on possible catches of right whales.

Sperm whales
The Scientific Committee had carried out an assessment of the Western Division stock and its resulting recommendation was that the males should be classified as PS. Strictly under the current management procedure females would be classified as SMS with a catch limit of 405. Projections, even if no catch was taken, suggested that they would become PS in 1983 and remain there for a considerable period. Accordingly it recommended a zero catch limit for females.

There was considerable discussion of these recommendations in Technical Committee. Japan strongly objected to them because of the theoretical nature of the analysis and the lack of corroboration from the observed catches per unit effort from its coastal fishery. It emphasised the estimate of more than 190,000 sperm whales aged over 10 or 11 years in this stock and questioned whether an historically established fishery conducted entirely within its EEZ should be halted on this evidence. It was not disregarding the advice of the IWC, but expected reasonable consideration for the local communities which would be affected.

Following the defeat of a proposal for a special meeting of the Scientific Committee and the Commission to discuss the North Pacific sperm whale problem, the Technical Committee agreed by a majority decision to recommend classification of both sexes as PS. This proposal failed to achieve the three-quarters majority necessary in the Commission, receiving 14 votes in favour and 7 against, with 3 abstentions.

The Seychelles, seconded by the Netherlands, then proposed that a provisional catch limit of zero be set on this stock for the 1981 season, subject to review at the next Annual Meeting. After some discussion of the implications of the proposal, the Chair ruled that this matter had been voted on already.

Further discussion and consultation then led to the Chair proposing, seconded by Spain and the Republic of Korea, a catch limit for males of 890 with provision for a by-catch of females not to exceed 11.5%, and a zero catch limit for females. Following an exchange of views concerning the need for the incorporation of size limits in this proposal, the UK proposed an amendment setting a minimum size limit for this stock of 35ft. The combined proposal was then voted on, but failed to attain three-quarters majority with 13 votes in favour, 5 against and 6 abstentions.

At various times in the debate delegates expressed their views on the need for a special meeting and the likelihood that the Scientific Committee could carry out any new analyses within a short time, since the implications and validation of the new assessment model employed must be fully examined. The Scientific Committee itself had put a possible meeting low on its list of priorities.

Eventually, after more discussions, the Chair proposed the following amendment to the Schedule, seconded by Japan:

for the North Pacific stock of sperm whales in the Western Division for the 1981 season, the catch limit for males will be 890, with one footnote to read:

'Included within this figure there shall be a by-catch of females not to exceed 11.5% and all whaling operations for this species are to cease when the by-catch is reached.'

A second footnote would read:

'It is forbidden to take or kill any sperm whale from this stock over 45 feet in length in the 1981 season.'

This proposal was then adopted by 18 votes in favour, 4 against with 2 abstentions.

13.3 North Atlantic 1981 Season
Minke whales
The Scientific Committee reviewed stock identities but recommended no change other than the names of two stock Areas. The Technical Committee endorsed the following classifications and catch limits which were adopted by the Commission.

The Commission noted the slight reduction in the proportion of females achieved by delaying the start of the season and urges continuation of that action.

The Seychelles registered its objection to the process of setting catch limits without safety factors and recommended that the Scientific Committee considers this in its assessments next year.

Fin whales
The Commission adopted the recommendations of the Scientific Committee through the Technical Committee on the following stocks:

Norway pointed out that there has been no catch from this stock for 10 years.

The Commission noted the eleven animals caught from this stock in 1979 off the Faroe Isles.

Denmark indicated that research on the West Greenland stock has now begun. The local fishermen believe the numbers are increasing. A similar increase is also reported around the Faroes and a research programme is under consideration.

The Scientific Committee carried out new analyses on the East Greenland - Iceland stock which produced varying results implying classification and appropriate catch limits as either:

After discussing the differences between these results, the extent of the data available and the validity of the assessment models used, the Technical Committee by a majority vote recommended classification as PS with a zero catch limit.

Iceland reiterated its view that the present block quota should be retained and questioned the output from the new assessment model used. Japan commented on the lack of supporting evidence for the new results, and the Seychelles spoke on the danger of setting block quotas in cases where there is uncertainty. The vote failed to obtain a three-quarters majority, receiving 11 in favour with 9 against and 3 abstentions.

Australia then proposed a compromise figure of 152 for 1981, which was seconded by the Seychelles and the USA. Iceland indicated that this figure was too low for it to accept, given that its fishery had been one of essentially unchanging catches and effort over the past 32 years. It offered an amendment for 254 fin whales in 1981 and 1982, which was seconded by Spain. This amendment was defeated, receiving 10 votes in favour and 12 against with 2 abstentions, but the original proposal also failed with 13 votes in favour and 9 against with 2 abstentions. The existing block quota in the Schedule therefore remains unchanged, but Iceland indicated that it will voluntarily limit its catches to 254 fin whales in 1981 and in 1982.

The Scientific Committee carried out two assessments on the Spain - Portugal - British Isles stock and recommended classification as SMS with a catch limit of 220 for 1980 and 1981. Some members considered the stock should be unclassified with a provisional catch limit of 143 for these two years.

The Technical Committee discussed the Spanish request for consideration of its position. Spain stated that it had lodged an objection to the catch limit last year because, in its view, irregular procedures had been followed. Its whaling industry is located in an economically depressed region, dependent on fishing. It has taken measures to prevent whaling activities within its area of jurisdiction by non-IWC members. It wishes to support the purposes of the Commission and had presented new data and will provide more and carry out further research. The Technical Committee then agreed to recommend by separate majority votes that for 1980 the stock should be classified SMS with a catch limit of 220, and in 1981 the stock should be unclassified with a catch limit of 143.

The Commission agreed to the figure of 220 for 1980, but the proposal for 1981 received 12 votes in favour and 7 against with 5 abstentions, which was not a three-quarters majority.

Spain then, in an attempt to achieve a compromise, offered to refrain from taking any sperm whales in 1981, accepted the International Observer Scheme and re-affirmed it had withdrawn its objection to the 1980 catch limit set last year. It proposed classification of the fin whale stock for 1981 as SMS with a catch limit of 240, and this was seconded by Japan. This proposal was defeated by 6 votes for to 15 against, with 3 abstentions.

There followed further discussion of the problem, covering the lack of adequate data for assessment and the desire of Spain to find a reasonable solution to its and the Commission's position. Eventually a consensus was reached and the Commission agreed to establish a catch limit of 440 for the two years 1980 and 1981, with the proviso that not more than 240 be taken in any one of these years.

Sei and Bryde's whales
The Commission accepted the Scientific Committee's advice through the Technical Committee as follows:

Bottlenose, right, blue and humpback whales
All PS except as otherwise provided under paragraphs 6.2 and 6.4.

Sperm whales
The Scientific Committee treated the whole area as one stock. Although there were few data on stock identity and several uncertainties about the current status of the stock, it recommended that the stock should remain unclassified and the catch limit for 1981 should not exceed 230 males and 42 females. This represents the average Icelandic and Spanish catches by sex for 1967-78. The Seychelles commented that the Scientific Committee had found evidence of a decline in the numbers of both sexes. The Technical Committee decided by a majority decision to recommend compromise figures of 0 females and 130 males, with the stock unclassified. This was agreed by the Commission.

13.4 Arctic and Northern Indian Ocean 1981 Season
The Commission adopted the recommendation of the Scientific Committee, endorsed by the Technical Committee, that all stocks should remain PS, except the Northern Indian Ocean Bryde's whales now included as IMS in the new Indian Ocean stock (paragraph 13.1) and noting the discussion under paragraph 6.2 on bowhead whales.

_