(from "Chairman's Report of the Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting")
The Scientific Committee recognised that catch limits for commercially exploited stocks are set at zero for the 1986 coastal and the 1985/86 pelagic seasons and thereafter. The Commission last year instructed the Scientific Committee to proceed with stock assessments in the normal way and to provide the usual management advice, and the Scientific Committee had given special priority to stocks where there is the likelihood of continued exploitation and to assessing the effects of a zero catch upon them.
12.2 Action arising
12.2.1 Sperm whales
Western North Pacific Stock
New biological data from the Japanese coastal fishery exhibited discrepancies
between results obtained by biologists and non-biologists, and the Scientific
Committee agreed that these discrepancies cast substantial doubt on the
records available.
Computing programs implementing two estimation techniques had been validated during the year but errors were detected in new versions of both programs which precluded their use for assessment during the meeting. This difficulty had arisen in part because of the current financial situation and the Scientific Committee will ensure that properly validated programmes and results will be available next year. No new assessments were therefore available at the present time.
Three views were put forward on the classification of the stock:
The Scientific Committee did not have the information necessary to evaluate the effect of a zero catch.
Sweden, seconded by St Lucia and France, expressed the view in the Technical Committee that this stock exemplifies problems which the Commission now faces with a stock which it believes to be depleted to below the PS level but with considerable uncertainty in the assessments.
Japan opposed this view, indicating that no new information is available since last year when the stock was left unclassified, and the Scientific Committee advice had been that the current level of catch would have little effect in the short term.
There followed discussions on the classification procedure under Schedule paragraph 10, and the question of the evidence needed for classification in a situation of such uncertainty. After an adjournment for a meeting of the Commissioners, Japan expressed its view that the information necessary to satisfy Schedule paragraph 10(c) is not available as has been reported explicitly and repeatedly by the Scientific Committee, and that it had a deep concern on the failure of execution of the validated programs for two consecutive years, which had been expected to give major information to resolve this problem. It also noted that the Scientific Committee assessed the stock size in 1982 as 200,000 animals. It believed that there must be positive evidence from the Scientific Committee to reclassify this stock.
Sweden emphasised that the special scientific meeting held in 1982 found that the males should be classified as a Protection Stock and that the program used for that analysis had been free from errors. The history of catching from this stock followed the classic pattern suggesting over-exploitation, with the fleets taking large males from the Bering Sea up to 1966 and then moving to lower latitudes taking increasing numbers of smaller whales, a majority females.
When put to the vote, the original proposal that the Technical Committee should recommend that this stock be classified as a Protection Stock, was approved by a majority.
In the plenary session the Chairman put forward a proposal, following further discussions in meetings of the Commissioners, in the form of a footnote to the entry in Table 3 of the Schedule for the North Pacific Western Division stock of sperm whales, as follows:
This stock shall be classified as a Protection Stock starting with the 1988 season. Subject to its assessment on the advice of the Scientific Committee, the Commission may decide to bring the classification into effect earlier.
This amendment to the Schedule was seconded by the Seychelles and adopted by consensus. Norway recorded its concern over whether this is proper under Article V of the Convention, since the Scientific Committee made no recommendation; it also doubted if it is prudent to defer entry into effect of such an absolute matter as classification as a Protection Stock.
12.2.2 Minke whales
Southern Hemisphere Stocks
The Scientific Committee had an inconclusive discussion on the biological
parameters of this stock and suggested a workshop to resolve some of the
problems, but found that national policies on access to data would make it
impossible to hold an effective workshop.
Differing views on the recruitment rates of the stock were 2 - 4%, no more
than 2%, with other dissenting views on the appropriateness of these
estimates.
Estimates of stock abundance from the IDCR sightings cruises do not differ substantially from last year. The Scientific Committee recommended that a further cruise should take place in Area V, preceded by analyses of earlier data. No estimates from mark recapture analyses will be available until these have been reviewed further. The Scientific Committee recommended that the Southern Hemisphere minke whale stocks should not be classified, but it was unable to reach agreement on the effect of zero catches.
Australia spoke in support of the sightings research cruise proposed and noted the Opening Statement of the USSR which indicated that that Government would stop whaling in the area temporarily from 1987/88 for technical reasons.
The Technical Committee agreed to recommend and the Commission approved by consensus that these stocks should be unclassified, and endorsed the proposals for sightings data analyses and a further sightings cruise.
Northern Hemisphere Stocks
Okhotsk Sea - Western Pacific
The Scientific Committee had no new information to require changes in the
stock boundaries.
Japanese sightings data had been used for assessments and gave a range of
10,015 - 13,520 for the 1981 population in the survey area which refers to
only part of the area designated for this stock.
CPUE analyses show no significant trends and some members of the Scientific
Committee considered that the stock should be classified SMS provisionally,
while others reached the same conclusion with the possibility that it might be
in the Protection Stock category.
The Scientific Committee therefore recommended that the stock be classified
provisionally as SMS, which was agreed by the Technical Committee and endorsed
by the Commission.
The Commission noted two views from the Scientific Committee on the effect of zero catches - an increase of between 65 to 200 animals (the replacement yield) or 339 (the average catch 1975 - 84).
North Eastern Atlantic
Last year the Scientific Committee gave 22,000 - 30,000 as a likely range of
the exploited stock size.
A new analysis suggested that the available stock is 20 - 30% of its initial
size with the females substantially more depleted than the males, and zero
catches would allow an annual increase of 0.6 - 2.0%.
Most members of the Scientific Committee believed that the stock should now be
classified as a Protection Stock, but noted the Norwegian commitment to review
and extend the CPUE series on which this conclusion depends in part; they
therefore suggested postponing a decision on classification until next year,
whilst urging that the catch in 1986 does not exceed the lowest estimate of
replacement yield, i.e.
360 whales. There are some indications of under-reporting of catches.
In the Technical Committee, Norway spoke of the earlier major research effort on this stock by different groups of scientists which had reached conclusions which it had accepted. Logbook data are being transferred to computer files and will be available for analysis later this year, and it would prefer to have this complete information before any recommendations are made. It is committed to take into account scientific advice, including from the Scientific Committee, in setting its catches and proposed postponing classification until the next Annual Meeting.
India expressed its belief that this stock is gravely depleted. It was concerned about the non-reporting problem and proposed that the stock should be classified as a Protection Stock immediately. This amendment was adopted as the recommendation of the Technical Committee by a majority vote.
Finland seconded the Technical Committee recommendation for classification as Protection Stock in the plenary session, and was supported by India, Sweden and Switzerland. Norway proposed to defer consideration of this recommendation until the next Annual Meeting, and this was seconded by the USA as a procedural motion, with support from Japan.
There followed an extended discussion on the relationship of the proposals before the meeting to each other, and which one should be voted on first. Eventually, the Chairman, with the concurrence of St. Lucia and Finland, pointed out that they were two different proposals relating to the same question, and therefore the Commission's Rule of Debate E.3 applied - that 'the Commission shall, unless it otherwise decides, vote on the proposals in the order in which they have been submitted'.
There was no opposition to this decision and the first proposal - for classification as a Protection Stock - was put to the vote. Norway registered its position as not participating and reserved its rights under the Convention, and Japan and the USSR explained their votes on the grounds of the procedural matter. There were 25 votes in favour, with 1 against and 10 abstentions, and the proposal was therefore adopted as an amendment to the Schedule.
The Chairman clarified the procedure adopted, explaining that a procedural motion could be carried by a simple majority, creating a paradoxical situation relative to the three-quarters majority needed for a Schedule amendment.
12.2.3 Fin whales
Spain - Portugal - British Isles Stock
A Spanish sightings cruise led to a minimum exploitable population estimate of
1,261 - 1,377.
The Scientific Committee had insufficient evidence for a new assessment and
the Technical Committee agreed that the stock should remain unclassified,
which was approved by the Commission.
12.2.4 Sei whales
The Scientific Committee had assessed no sei whale stocks this year.
12.2.5 Bryde's whales
Western North Pacific Stock
The data from two sightings cruises had been reanalysed by the Scientific
Committee to give an estimate of 13,098 whales in the survey area and a total
exploitable population of 17,618.
A mark recapture analysis gave a figure of 25,591 whales in 1981.
A simulation model led to four estimates of the replacement yield in the range
248 - 324, and a classification of either IMS or SMS.
The Commission approved the Technical Committee recommendation for no change of classification, which is at present IMS.
Peruvian Stock
No new data were available this year, but the Scientific Committee reviewed
the documents submitted last year.
The stock is probably depleted or possibly declining, and the Scientific
Committee urged that up to date catch and effort data be provided.
The Technical Committee and the Commission agreed to make no change in classification of this stock which is at present unclassified.
12.2.6 Bottlenose whales
Baird's beaked whale
Sightings estimates give a population size of 4,220 considered an
under-estimate to some degree.
The Scientific Committee could not determine if the population could sustain
the present level of catch - a total of 38 whales from the national quota of
40 in 1984.
These comments were noted by the Technical Committee and the Commission.
12.2.7 Protected species
The Technical Committee and the Commission endorsed the recommendation of the
Scientific Committee that all stocks currently classified as Protection Stocks
should remain so.
12.2.8 Stocks not assessed by the Scientific Committee this year
Sea of Japan - Yellow Sea - East China Sea minke whale Stock
The People's Republic of China expressed its view that this stock had been
depleted through catches taken by other nations and expressed the hope that
these countries will end their hunting in the area.
It proposed that the stock should be classified as a Protection Stock.
New Zealand noted that the majority view of the Scientific Committee in 1983
was that this should be a Protection Stock because analysis indicated a
decline to 40 - 50% of the 1970 level, and the block quota previously in force
had now ended.
The Republic of Korea pointed out that the stock was unclassified in 1984 because of the uncertainty in the assessments, and it intended to conduct a research programme on these whales. Japan commented that no new analyses had been carried out this year to lead to a change in classification.
On being put to the vote, in the Technical Committee, the proposal to classify the stock as PS was adopted by a majority. The proposal was then approved by consensus in the plenary, the Republic of Korea and Japan recording their reservations, and the People's Republic of China reiterating its support for conservation of resources in this region.
East China Sea Bryde's whale Stock
The People's Republic of China proposed that this stock should also be
classified as a Protection Stock because it believes it had been depleted.
The UK asked for the latest scientific advice on classification.
This was given two years ago when the Scientific Committee agreed that the
stock should be unclassified.
The Commission agreed by consensus to classify this as a Protection Stock on the recommendation of the Technical Committee. Japan reserved its position on the procedural aspects of the decision and the Republic of Korea also registered its reservations.
All other stocks
The Technical Committee agreed to recommend that there should be no change in
the classification of all other stocks not assessed, and this was approved by
the Commission.
_