(from "Chairman's Report of the Thirty-Third Annual Meeting")
11.1.2 Minke whale stocks in the North Pacific
The Scientific Committee had agreed to define these areas at the next meeting
and therefore made no recommendation now.
This was accepted by the Technical Committee and agreed by the Commission.
11.2 Southern Hemisphere 1981/82 Pelagic Season and 1982 Coastal
Season
The Chairman of the Scientific Committee presented the report of his Committee
on the several stocks involved and the Technical Committee and the Commission
commented and took action as indicated.
11.2.1 Sei whales
The Scientific Committee had no new data to altar previous assessments and
recommended that the stocks in Areas I to VI should remain Protected Stocks.
The Technical Committee endorsed this recommendation which was agreed by the
Commission.
11.2.2 Minke whales
The Scientific Committee considered various sub-divisions but ultimately
presented results for the present six management Areas.
There was a majority view recommending two possible sets of catch limits for
Areas I and III - VI and an alternative view expressing a more cautious
approach, with catch limits set no greater than those adopted last year.
The Technical Committee considered a series of figures based on last year's catch limits. Japan pointed out that the figures are not in accordance with the recommendation by most of the Scientific Committee. There is evidence of availability of higher catches since stock size estimates have increased over the past three years, and the dissenting scientists did not suggest a need to reduce the catch from last year's level.
Following discussion of the scientific analyses, particularly with respect to the uncertainty in estimates and the general reliability of the replacement yield values, the Seychelles, USA and Jamaica urged a cautious approach, while Japan, Brazil and USSR favoured the majority recommendation of the Scientific Committee.
By a majority vote the Technical Committee then adopted the proposed figures.
For Area II the Scientific Committee had no agreed estimates of stock size and noted that a proposed cruise in the next season should give better estimates next year. It therefore made no recommendation.
The Technical Committee agreed by a majority vote to recommend the same figure as last year, after Japan and the USSR expressed their view that there is no need to be particularly conservative, noting in particular an increase in the Brazilian CPUEs.
The Technical Committee also endorsed the recommendations of the Scientific Committee with respect to obtaining improved data for the Brazilian minke whale operations, further study on sightings estimates, and implementation of new assessment and management Areas.
After discussion among Commissioners, Japan, seconded by Spain and the USSR, proposed in Plenary Session an amended set of figures for the catch limits as follows:
Area I 886 IV 1,548 II 1,190 V 1,131 III 2,093 VI 1,254
It further proposed a 5% allowance between Areas, with the maximum catch not to exceed 8,102.
As France had proposed a moratorium on catching minke whales it called for a vote, and the amendment received 18 votes in favour, with 1 against and 10 abstentions, thus obtaining the three quarters majority required to amend the Schedule.
11.2.3 Fin whales
The Scientific Committee agreed there is no reason to change the present
classification and the Technical Committee agreed and the Commission confirmed
that fin whales should remain Protected Stocks.
11.2.4 Blue whales
The Commission accepted the recommendations of the Scientific Committee
endorsed by the Technical Committee that these stocks should remain protected,
and that a re-analysis of stocks should be undertaken.
11.2.5 Humpback whales
The Technical Committee endorsed and the Commission agreed with the
recommendations of the Scientific Committee that stocks should remain
protected and that the current status of the stocks off Peru should be
surveyed.
11.2.6 Right whales
The Scientific Committee recommended that all stocks should remain protected.
This was agreed by the Commission after endorsement by the Technical Committee
together with three further recommendations on systematic sighting surveys,
the need to obtain information on the stock off Argentina and studies of
historical records.
11.2.7 Bryde's whale
Peruvian stock
The Scientific Committee re-assessed this stock and recommended classification
as IMS with a catch limit of 244.
Peru put forward a proposal to allow the uncaught portion of its 1981 quota (102 whales) to be added in two equal parts to the catch limit recommended by the Scientific Committee in 1982 and 1983. This request was made in association with a change in the whaling season, which it intended to start in November rather than January each year. The Technical Committee discussed at length the two elements of the change in season and the adjustment of the catch limits. There was general agreement that it was the prerogative of Contracting Governments to set the season and it agreed to recommend that a flexible approach should be taken by the Commission in recognising the legal difficulty involved concerning the extent of catching within any twelve month period. However, there were several expressions of concern over the concept of adding an uncaught quota in any one year to the following season's catch limit.
Finally, the Technical Committee by a majority vote and without setting a precedent agreed to recommend a catch limit of 244.
In the Plenary Session, Peru asked that 76 whales uncaught in the 1981 season should be added to the 1982 catch limit. The Seychelles noted that whaling operations had been disrupted by a border conflict and proposed a form of words as an appropriate amendment to the Schedule. This retained the present classification as SMS and added a footnote to the catch limit, which after some working changes to accommodate various legal points was adopted by consensus in the Commission as follows:
1 Available to be taken in the six month period starting in November 1981.
SMS 2441 762
2 Special remainder from 1981 coastal season that may be taken in the six months period starting in November 1981 making a total of 320 whales which may be taken during this period pursuant to this and the immediately preceding footnote.
Peru was requested to look at the definition of 'coastal season' to avoid perpetuating the problem, ready for further consideration in the Infractions Sub-committee next year.
Other Bryde's stocks
No new information was available to the Scientific Committee, and on the
recommendation of the Technical Committee the Commission adopted the following
classifications and catch limits:
| Western South Pacific | IMS | 237 | Southern Indian Ocean | IMS | 197 | ||||||||
| Solomon Islands | IMS | 0 | South Atlantic | - | 0 | ||||||||
| Eastern South Pacific | IMS | 188 | South African inshore | - | 0 |
11.2.8 Sperm whales
Because of the lack of time, it was not possible for the Scientific Committee
to undertake assessment of the stocks, and the Technical Committee recommended
that they should be unclassified, with zero catch limits.
The Commission concurred with this action as described under Agenda Item 7.4.
11.3 North Pacific 1982 season
11.3.1 Sei whales
Sightings from Japanese cruises suggest a slow recovery of this stock, and the
Scientific Committee recommended that it remain protected, which was endorsed
by the Technical Committee and agreed by the Commission.
11.3.2 Minke whales
The Commission noted that the Scientific Committee will provide definitions
for the stock boundaries of minke whales in the North Pacific at the next
meeting.
The Scientific Committee will also give specific attention next year to
classifying minke whale stocks in the Northern Hemisphere in a coherent and
consistent way.
Sea of Japan - Yellow Sea - East China Sea
The Scientific Committee had no significant new information and the Commission
agreed to maintain the block quota of 3,634 for 1980/84, with a maximum of 940
in any one year, together with provisional classification as SMS.
This followed discussion in the Technical Committee that the stock be
unclassified.
The Commission also accepted the recommendations of the Scientific Committee endorsed by the Technical Committee that past Republic of Korea log book data should be analysed and that age and reproductive material is collected from this stock.
Okhotsk Sea - West Pacific
The Commission agreed, on the Scientific Committee's recommendation endorsed
by the Technical Committee, to retain the block quota of 1,678 for 1980/84
with a maximum of 421 in any one year with continued classification as SMS, on
the basis of the continued stability of the CPUE.
It also recommended that an attempt be made to refine the long series of CPUE
data.
Remainder
The Technical Committee endorsed the Scientific recommendation for IMS
classification with a zero catch limit, and this was accepted by the
Commission.
11.3.3 Fin whales
The Scientific Committee received no new information and recommended continued
protection. This was agreed by the Technical Committee and the Commission.
11.3.4 Blue and humpback whales
The Technical Committee recommended continued protection for both these
species on the advice of the Scientific Committee, and this was endorsed by
the Commission.
11.3.5 Right whales
The Scientific Committee believes that apart from the remnant of the Okhotsk
Sea stock, continued existence of viable stocks in the rest of the North
Pacific is in doubt.
It recommended that the People's Republic of China should be asked to provide
data on the status of right whales off China, with details of any past
catches.
The People's Republic of China indicated that they are not whaling at present,
and have only taken a few minke whales in the Yellow Sea in the past, but
there are no statistics available.
The Technical Committee endorsed and the Commission adopted the Scientific Committee's recommendation to continue protection status.
11.3.6 Gray whales
The Technical Committee recommended that the Western Stock remain protected,
and this was accepted by the Commission.
11.3.7 Bryde's whales
The Scientific Committee clarified stock boundaries which were adopted by the
Commission as follows:
East China Sea
The Scientific Committee has never assessed this stock, but recommended that
the present catch limit should not exceed the average annual catches from
1955 - 74 of 19.
The Technical Committee agreed to retain the classification as SMS with this
catch limit, and this was seconded in the Plenary Session by Japan.
The USA noted that 7 large whales were caught this year by the Republic of Korea, 4 of which were identified as fin whales. Since there have been no recent catches of Bryde's whales in the area by Japan or the Republic of Korea, it proposed a zero catch limit to prevent any future problems of identification. This was seconded by Sweden, Jamaica and Uruguay.
After discussion of this amendment, including comment by Japan on the conflict with the unanimous recommendation of the Scientific Committee, and a statement by the Republic of Korea that it is willing to accept international observers, the USA withdrew its amendment and the Commission agreed to the classification as SMS with a catch limit of 19.
Western
Re-analysis by the Scientific Committee resulted in a small change in the
recommended catch limit to 507, and reclassification as IMS.
This was agreed by the Technical Committee and endorsed by the Commission.
Eastern
This stock has never been exploited.
The Scientific Committee recommended that it should remain IMS with a zero
catch limit, and this was agreed by the Technical Committee and the
Commission.
11.3.8 Sperm whales
The Scientific Committee reported that a data handling error had occurred last
year in an assessment calculation which had now been corrected.
Two new techniques have been developed subsequently, but there was still need
for further close examination of these assessment methods.
Western
Assessments were attempted using a slightly different boundary for ease of
data handling which resulted in two views: one that the results obtained could
be used, the other hesitating to use them before further analyses are carried
out.
These differences were unresolved.
The Scientific Committee therefore had no unequivocal advice to the
Commission.
Japan spoke of its sperm whale catches from small coastal stations within two hundred miles of its coast. It outlined the economic and social consequences which would result if this operation was to cease. Catches were reduced last year following an analysis with which faults had been found later, and it pointed out that the two assessment models used this year are extremely complex. It believes that the present small catch cannot seriously endanger the stock and suggested that there should be no catch limit set now, and that a special meeting is needed on this specific subject. The USSR supported the Japanese position, pointing out that it is important to find the true state of the stock.
The Seychelles believes that the data indicate a decline in reproductive performance, and that the stock will continue to decline even in the absence of hunting. It therefore proposed a zero catch limit, which was adopted by a majority vote in the Technical Committee.
Further discussion in Plenary Session was subsumed in Agenda Item 7.4, in which the Commission agreed to leave the catch limits undetermined until special meetings of the Scientific Committee and of the Commission have been held.
Eastern
The Technical Committee recommended that the stock should remain unclassified,
with a zero catch limit, and this was agreed by the Commission under Agenda
Item 7.4.
11.4 North Atlantic 1982 season
11.4.1 Sei whales
Iceland - Denmark Strait
In the absence of any new assessment, the Scientific Committee recommended
that this stock should remain SMS and with the block quota of 504 for 1980/85,
the maximum catch not to exceed 100 in any one year.
This was agreed by the Technical Committee and approved by the Commission.
Nova Scotia
There is no new information on this stock.
The Technical Committee endorsed the recommendation of the Scientific
Committee that it should remain protected, and this was agreed by the
Commission.
Eastern
The Commission adopted the Technical Committee's recommendation that there
should be no change, with the stock unclassified and with a zero catch limit.
Spain indicated that it believes sei/Bryde's whales have appeared in its past catches in this area, and gave notice that it will ask for a special permit catch of 12 of these whales, to confirm the species and to provide material for full biological analysis.
11.4.2 Minke whales
North Eastern
Following new analyses, the Scientific Committee recommended that the stock
should remain SMS with a catch limit of 1,790.
It also recommended that further CPUE analyses should be carried out.
This was agreed by the Commission after endorsement by the Technical Committee
which noted that the proportion of females in the catch is expected to be
reduced by restrictions on the time and location of the whaling operations.
Central
Noting the lack of trend in the CPUE series, the Scientific Committee
recommended that the stock continue to be classified provisionally as SMS with
a catch limit of 320. This was endorsed by the Technical Committee and agreed
by the Commission.
West Greenland
The Scientific Committee recommended that the stock remain classified as SMS
with a block quota of 1,778 for 1981/85, with a maximum of 444 in any one
year.
It also recommended further work on the CPUE data.
This was agreed by the Technical Committee and adopted by the Commission which
noted the Scientific Committee view that there is no simple operational way of
reducing the high percentage of females in the catch.
Canadian East Coast
There was no new information on this stock.
The Technical Committee, on the recommendation of the Scientific Committee,
agreed that it should remain unclassified, with a zero catch limit pending
satisfactory estimates of stock size, and this was approved by the Commission.
11.4.3 Fin whales
East Greenland - Iceland
Several analyses by the Scientific Committee gave rather similar results, with
an estimate of replacement yield of 158.
The Scientific Committee recommended that the stock should be classified as
SMS with this catch limit, rather than one based on the average catch over a
long period.
Since some estimates of stock size were below the conventional MSY level, the
Committee also recommended that the catch limits be set for one year at a
time, and that the stock be carefully monitored.
Iceland pointed out that it had applied national catch limits lower than those set by the Commission, which was evidence of its concern for a cautious approach to the utilisation of this stock. It asked for consideration from the Commission in adjusting to such a large reduction as recommended, and proposed that this might be taken in two steps, with half of the reduction this year, and therefore proposed a catch limit of 200. This proposal was defeated by a majority vote in the Technical Committee, which went on to adopt by a majority vote the figure of 158 recommended by the Scientific Committee after Iceland emphasized that it cannot accept such a big reduction in one step, and Japan questioned whether the extra 50 whales requested will seriously affect the stock.
In the Plenary Session Iceland proposed an amendment to the Technical Committee recommendation, of the same classification as SMS but with a catch limit of 194. This was seconded by Japan and the USSR and adopted as an amendment to the Schedule by 10 votes in favour to none against with 19 abstentions.
Spain - Portugal - British Isles
The Scientific Committee was still unable to carry out analyses using recent
data, so that it has used catch and effort series from the 1920s.
This resulted in two views: that the stock be classified SMS with a catch
limit of 210, or that the apparently stable average annual catch during
1968 - 77 of 137 should be recommended.
France commented on the large number of young fin whales below minimum size reported this year, and the USA on the long extrapolation involved in the scientific assessment and the gaps in the data. It therefore proposed a zero catch limit which was adopted by a majority vote in the Technical Committee, although Spain pointed out that there is no scientific basis for a zero catch limit, and Iceland and Norway referred to the Scientific Committee figures of 137 or 210.
The Technical Committee's recommendation was seconded by France and the USA in Plenary Session where Spain proposed an amendment for a catch limit of 210 which was seconded by Japan and the USSR. France and the USA re-emphasized their concerns over the problems of assessing this stock, and were supported by Sweden and St Lucia.
The UK expressed its misgivings over the choice which lay before the meeting, but suggested that in the wider context of the integrity of the Commission it could support the figure of 210, not for its own sake but rather than have no catch limit set at all. This position was shared by Norway, Denmark, Argentina and Uruguay. The Commission then agreed to the classification as SMS with a catch limit of 210 by consensus, the USA, France, St Lucia, and Jamaica recording their reservations.
Nova Scotia
In the absence of new information, the Scientific Committee recommended PS,
and this was agreed by the Technical Committee and adopted by the Commission.
West Greenland
It was agreed to continue classification as SMS with a catch limit of 6.
West Norway
It was agreed that this stock should remain protected.
Newfoundland - Labrador and North Norway
The Scientific Committee was unable to agree on recommendations for these
presently unexploited stocks.
Three proposals were supported: that the stocks should be unclassified with
last year's catch limits; classified with zero catch limits; or IMS with zero
catch limits.
Norway stated that the North Norway stock had been unexploited since 1971, and noted that the Scientific Committee will pay special attention to classifying North Atlantic fin whale stocks in a coherent and consistent way next year. It therefore proposed that for the present the North Norway stock continue as SMS with a catch limit of 61, and the Newfoundland - Labrador stock be classified as IMS with a catch limit of 90. This was agreed by the Technical Committee and adopted by the Commission.
11.4.4 Blue, Humpback and Right whales
The Technical Committee agreed with the Scientific Committee recommendation
that these stocks should continue to be protected.
It also endorsed the Scientific Committee recommendation that surveys of the
right whale population in the Bay of Fundy area should be continued in view of
proposals for accelerated industrial development.
Both these recommendations were approved by the Commission.
11.4.5 Bryde's whales
The Commission agreed to a classification of IMS with zero catch limit from
the Technical Committee.
11.4.6 Sperm whales
The Scientific Committee considered that none of the population estimates it
had carried out were reliable, but agreed that stocks of both males and
females have declined, although it was unable to agree on the extent of those
declines.
It recommended caution in the setting of catch limits, which should not exceed
those set by the Commission last year, but an alternative view suggested that
stocks should be classified as protected.
The Seychelles pointed out the paucity of data available, although this situation might improve if and when Portugal joins the IWC, since the majority of catches of females are taken under its jurisdiction. It proposed a zero catch limit in Technical Committee.
Iceland indicated that it was willing to accept a zero catch limit for 1982, but asked if its quota for this year of 130 sperm whales could be taken over the two years. It pointed out that it has shown responsibility in the past by reducing catches below the Commission's recommendations and by increasing the national minimum size limit to 40 feet.
Several delegations expressed their views on such a procedure, and Spain pointed out that it had imposed a voluntary cessation of its own sperm whale catches, and was also concerned over the take by non-IWC member governments.
The Technical Committee adopted by a majority vote the proposal for a zero catch limit, which in Plenary Session was agreed under Agenda Item 7.4 with a special footnote allowing Iceland to take the uncaught part of its 1981 quota during the 1982 season.
11.5 Northern Indian Ocean 1982 season
11.5.1 Minke whales
In the absence of information, the Scientific Committee recommended
classification as IMS, with zero catch limits pending satisfactory estimates
of stock sizes. This was agreed by the Technical Committee and the Commission.
11.5.2 Bryde's whales
The Technical Committee recommended that this stock should be unclassified,
with zero catch limit, and this was agreed by the Commission.
11.5.3 Blue, Humpback and Right whales
On the advice of the Scientific Committee, the Technical Committee recommended
and the Commission agreed that these stocks should remain protected.
_