13. SMALL CETACEANS

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


13.1 Consideration of the Commission's responsibilities for small cetaceans
Australia introduced a proposed amendment to the Resolution adopted by the Commission at its last Annual Meeting which it believed was a purely technical modification to recognize that the Scientific Committee as an organ of the Commission should act and be addressed through the Commission rather than directly.

Mexico stated that it does not believe small cetaceans within coastal waters are within the IWC's jurisdiction or competence. This view was shared by Chile and Brazil. Mexico also made clear that the information provided by Mexico to the Scientific Committee concerning small cetaceans is only for scientific information and does not in any way represent a recognition by Mexico that the IWC is the forum in which to consider these species. There was an exchange of views on the effect of the proposed Australian amendment and Norway suggested that the Technical Committee should recognize that the amendment is restricted to communication and is not related to the Commission's competence.

Finally, the Technical Committee agreed to put this position to the Plenary, where there were further statements of their positions by several member governments. In particular, Argentina, Chile, Japan, Mexico, Peru, the USSR and Uruguay all made clear that they do not believe small cetaceans are within the jurisdiction or competence of the IWC.


13.2 Report of the Scientific Committee
The Scientific Committee noted that direct and incidental catches by IWC members of small cetaceans are estimated to total 112,000. It recommended that:

-
the northern bottlenose whale should remain protected and that a recommended research programme should be carried out;
-
the white whale and the narwhal be listed in Schedule paragraph 1, though some thought this recommendation inappropriate;
-
research be encouraged in both species and that various stocks should be protected;
-
killer whales on the coast of Norway be unclassified with zero catch limit pending assessment and identification of stocks, and if the fishery continues there should be improved reporting of effort and research;
-
Southern Hemisphere killer whales should be classified IMS with a zero catch limit, and the USSR be requested to report on its large sample from the Antarctic;
-
fishing effort should be reported and studies encouraged on pilot whales in Japan and the Faroes;
-
striped dolphins off Japan are reassessed;
-
member nations collect and submit full statistics on small cetacean catches as previously requested.

The Technical Committee took note of the report of the Scientific Committee, and adopted by a majority vote a Resolution proposed by the USA concerning white whales and narwhals in Canada. The USA spoke on its recognition of the jurisdictional problems relating to small cetaceans, and seconded with Sweden the Resolution in the Plenary Session. It was recognised that Canada had specifically requested scientific advice and several members expressed their serious concern over the stocks involved. Denmark, Chile, Japan, Mexico and the USSR all stated their reservations before the Resolution (Appendix 5) was adopted by 13 votes in favour to 8 against with 8 abstentions.

Uruguay emphasised that its vote in no way affected its strong support for sovereign rights within the 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone.

Norway placed on record that it has established national regulations for the take of killer whales from its coast according to previous scientific advice. Since the advice this year is significantly different it will study the matter very seriously and reserved its position in the meantime.

The Netherlands, seconded by Sweden, Switzerland and the USA, proposed that for 1982 the northern bottlenose whale should be classified as a Protected Stock with a zero catch limit, and this was unanimously agreed by the Commission.

_