(from "REP. INT. WHAL. COMMN 33, 1983")

Observers were present from two non-member governments, the Federal Republic of Germany and Finland, two inter-governmental organisations, the Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), and the Commission of the European Communities (CEC), the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), and 27 international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) listed in Appendix 2.

The Scientific Committee had available to it an improved data set, although this was still not totally complete, and it recommended that the completion of this data base should be made a matter of priority for its future work.

Two assessment techniques available last year had been further developed and a sub-group of the Scientific Committee made an extensive review of these techniques. Previous deficiencies of the length-specific procedure had been rectified and the meeting concluded that it appeared to perform satisfactorily. It was agreed that this procedure could be used for estimation of population sizes at the meeting. Although some concerns were expressed on several aspects and the implementation of the age-specific technique, it was agreed that its performance did not preclude its use for estimation during the meeting.

The Scientific Committee discussed the problems of stock definition, examining evidence for alternative proposed boundaries. Biological parameters including pregnancy rates, reserve male ratio, age at sexual maturity of males and mean age at recruitment were also reconsidered. Lacking quantifiable modifications of the existing values it was agreed to retain the figures used previously.

Reservations were expressed within the Committee on the reliability of both the assessment techniques, which were supported by comparisons with evidence from other procedures including catch-per-unit-of-effort and sightings. Most members of the Committee believed that, on balance, the doubts raised about the age-specific technique were more severe than those raised about length-specific technique although Japanese scientists questioned several important aspects of the length-specific technique.

The Scientific Committee made some projections using these two techniques and with the data sets and population boundaries thought most appropriate. This involved the use of the 'La Jolla' population model for calculating MSY levels and catches, which is itself under question because its predictions on Southern Hemisphere populations differ in opposite directions from observations for two populations.

Classifications and catch limits for both assessment techniques were tabulated and qualified because of the concerns expressed on the models and the parameter values. Similarly, replacement yields and the effect of continuation of current catches were projected, and other management measures were discussed briefly. However, lack of time prevented any recommendations being formulated.

In the Technical Committee, the Seychelles commented that it had hoped for clear recommendations although this result was not unexpected because of the scientific complexities involved and the political loyalties of the participants. It suggested that the Technical Committee should look for the facts in the Scientific Committee report and asked for clarification of certain points. After these had been responded to by Dr Tillman, the Seychelles concluded that any catch of females would be deleterious and therefore inadvisable.

Japan spoke of the difficulties encountered in estimating stock size and MSY levels. It objected to the political motivation inferred by the Seychelles. It noted that basic errors in the length-specific model used in 1980 had been found later by its scientists and subsequently accepted by the Scientific Committee, as well as a data handling error made in 1981. In both cases the majority of the Scientific Committee had accepted the initial results. The 160° West boundary puts the whole of the Bering Sea into the western stock, which seems unlikely on biological grounds. The alternative 'Cambridge' boundary with the length-specific model gives results which are completely different and identical to those from the age-specific model. Japan also commented on the statement by FAO which points out that there is clear agreement among the scientists on several important points including the fact that the present stock is large. Japan also stated that the report of the Scientific Committee clearly indicated that continuing the current harvest will barely affect the stock.

Norway expressed its disappointment that the Scientific Committee had not made any recommendations, which it viewed as both unsatisfactory and unacceptable. It suggested an improved reporting style to set out what is common ground and the origin of divergent views between scientists, in a step by step approach. It believes that best scientific judgement should be used to arrive at a practical conclusion rather than a mechanical procedure for management.

Australia pointed out that the current Schedule requires catch limits to be set following scientific advice. Since this advice is not forthcoming it might be better not to set any catch limits.

Japan re-emphasised that the most conservative estimates indicated a stock of more than 200,000 sperm whales over 10 years of age. Exploitation is permitted by the Commission on much smaller stocks in the North Atlantic.

Following clarification of further scientific points raised by St Lucia, the USA emphasised that there is bound to be uncertainty in science at the frontiers of knowledge. It believes that the present Scientific Committee report represents its best judgement and, since the answers are not certain, conservative action is indicated.

7.2 Action arising
Australia noted in the Technical Committee that Japan has objected to the footnote in Table 3 of the Schedule that no whales may be taken from the North Pacific Western Division sperm whale stock until catch limits including any limitations on size and sex are established by the Commission. It suggested that this meeting should leave the Schedule as it is and refer the question of the 1982 quotas to be reconsidered at the forthcoming Annual Meeting. In the meantime, the Scientific Committee should be asked to complete the review undertaken at the recent Special Meeting as a matter of priority, but not to the extent of detracting from consideration of other matters at its regular annual session.

The Technical Committee agreed to recommend this action to the Plenary Session after expressions of support from several delegations, and the Commission agreed by consensus to adopt this procedure.

The USA replied that it will provide a complete report on all matters pertaining to the bowhead whale at the forthcoming Annual Meeting, including the habitat question. In the meantime, it reported that the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission and the US Government are committed to finding ways to improve the hunting efficiency, and that all three whales struck by whalers from Kaktovik in the fall were landed. An amendment to the management plan requires that a whale must first be struck with a harpoon or darting gun with line attached before a shoulder gun is used. Improvements in weapon design, and workshops on catching efficiency and the size limitations have also been undertaken.

Both Australia and the Netherlands expressed appreciation of the progress which had been made, and looked forward to the detailed report being prepared.

10.2 Objections to the Decision on the use of Cold Grenade Harpoons
The Netherlands suggested discussion of the objections lodged by five governments on the ban on the use of the cold grenade harpoon for killing minke whales from the 1982/83 pelagic and the 1983 coastal seasons. It spoke on the fact that the decision had been adopted by consensus at the last Annual Meeting, although reservations were entered by several governments which later lodged objections. It was concerned that use of the objection procedure might prove detrimental to the structure of the Commission's decision-making process and undermine what had been achieved in the IWC. The Netherlands also expressed the hope that the objecting governments would comply with the Commission's decision by the time it becomes effective.

Japan spoke of the research it is currently pursuing to develop an improved explosive harpoon suitable for minke whales. It is not certain that this can be perfected by the deadline, which was the reason for lodging its objection. It will report on the latest experiments to the next Annual Meeting, and is pleased to give or receive technical assistance or consultations with other member countries.

The Republic of Korea commented that it had not filed an objection, because it has only a small-scale coastal whaling operation and wished to wait and see how the pelagic whaling nations succeeded in developing suitable devices.

Norway mentioned the need to reach viable consensus in adopting decisions, and believed that the consensus on the use of the cold grenade harpoon could not be viable because a number of governments clearly stated that they were not in a position to comply for reasons which they explained. Norway went on to describe the particular difficulties the use of an explosive harpoon would have on the small whaling/fishing vessels in its fleet. It was currently fitting out a cruise to study supplementary killing techniques by high velocity large calibre projectiles. Alternative or supplementary methods will be adopted as soon as they are safe.

Brazil stated that 72.8% of whales are killed with the first harpoon in its whaling operation, and an electric lance is used for the remainder. It has approached Japan for technical assistance on the development of a safe explosive harpoon that will not leave powder or metal residues in the meat used for human consumption in an area of great need of proteins, but it cannot guarantee to meet the deadline established by the Commission.

10.3 Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources
The Commissioner for Australia reported that the AMLR Convention will come into force on 7 April 1982, and is now being ratified by Argentina, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, South Africa, the USSR, the UK and the USA. The first meeting of the Commission and its Scientific Committee established by the Convention will be held in Hobart, Australia, 25 May - 11 June 1982. It is expected that the IWC, and other organisations specifically mentioned in the Convention and which attended the preparatory meeting in Hobart last year, will be admitted as observers.

The Commission agreed that the Government of Australia should again be asked to provide an observer on behalf of the IWC, as it had kindly done at earlier meetings.

_