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

16.2.1 Definition of aboriginal subsistence whaling
There was no discussion of this matter in the Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee in the absence of the proposer, but there was extensive discussion of the issues involved in the Technical Committee under Agenda Item 16.2.7.

16.2.2 Bering Sea stock of bowhead whales
The Scientific Committee reviewed the recent catch and strike figures. An analysis of struck and lost rate data showed that adult whales (>13m) are not more likely to be struck and lost than immatures. There is a continuing downward trend in the annual struck and lost rate, and a significant decrease has occurred since 1982, with no significant differences between villages. The annual average length of landed bowhead whales shows no increase since 1981 when the catching of smaller whales (<13m) was recommended. Aerial photogrammetry indicates widely variable calf recruitment between years, and it was recommended that past records should be examined to see if regular fluctuations occurred.

The Scientific Committee accepted an estimate of current population size of 7,200 with an estimated standard error of 2,400. This is considerably higher than the previous estimate of 4,417 due to the use of both visual and acoustic data, instead of visual data alone and an estimation method which produces a downward bias in estimates. The Scientific Committee considered the effects of industrial development and particularly the possible displacement offshore by seismic exploration airgun blasts. Further analyses were recommended in these studies and the publication of much relevant literature on industrial development effects.

As the result of a simulation exercise to develop management advice the Scientific Committee recommended that this stock remains PS but that tests of sensitivity of the model should be undertaken. The simulation showed that the population had, for most values of an acceptable parameter range, increased under an average annual catch since 1910 of 24 animals. The most appropriate values of the replacement yield are in the range 55 - 173 whales. It was noted that the aboriginal whaling scheme allows only a proportion of these to be taken, The Scientific Committee was unable to determine the minimum population level but the size of the current best population estimate and the trajectories in the model indicate that the stock is very likely to be above that level.

The Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee reviewed these results and the Humane Killing Working Group report. It noted a preliminary request by the USSR for 3 - 5 bowheads a year, and that there was no further information on aboriginal subsistence need beyond that reported to and evaluated by last year's meeting,

The USA presented a proposal in the Technical Committee for a catch limit for 1987 of 32 struck and for 1988 of 35 struck, which was seconded by Australia and supported by the Republic of Korea and Denmark. The Netherlands expressed its view that caution should be exercised in setting catch limits, because the accuracy of the estimates needs to be improved by further review in the Scientific Committee, but it could accept the US proposal. Mexico supported this position. Japan sought clarification of the present US provision of a strike limit of 32 for 1987, achieved by carrying over unused strikes from previous years. The USA emphasised that this is the reason why it has resubmitted a figure for 1987 to overcome the ambiguity of the present Schedule provision.

The Technical Committee and the Commission adopted this proposal.

16.2.3 Eastern Pacific stock of gray whales
The Scientific Committee did not have this as a priority stock this year, and so had no new information available. The Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee received a lengthy submission from the USSR on the use of whale products by the aboriginal population of the Chukhot region. Appreciation was expressed for the great effort reflected in this submission and in order to give the document the further study and attention it deserved the Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee will consider it again at the next meeting.

The Technical Committee agreed to recommend no change in the present catch limit which was accepted by the Commission.

The USSR proposed that the gray whale catch limit should be set for two years, as had the bowhead catch limit, but for the years 1988 and 1989.

The Chairman of the Technical Committee explained that the gray whale catch limit is given in Table 1 of the Schedule and authorised in paragraph 13 by reference to Table 1. The figures in Table 1 remain by changing the date of the season, unless specifically changed. It would be difficult to draft Table 1 so as to affect future seasons. Bowhead whales have a zero catch limit set in Table 1, with a specific exception in paragraph 13 which has in the past covered a number of years. This is still subject to annual review on the basis of advice from the Scientific Committee.

The USSR, in the light of this explanation, did not propose a specific amendment but asked that its position be put on record.

16.2.4 West Greenland stocks
The Scientific Committee noted that the 1986 minke whale catch limit of 130 had been exceeded by 15 whales. The stock had not been assessed since 1985 when it recommended a catch limit of less than 50 for one year only. There are continuing uncertainties in the identity, current population size and replacement yield for this stock.

The Scientific Committee made no assessments at this meeting of the fin whale stock.

The Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee received the views of Denmark on the difficulties created by the reduction of the humpback and minke whale quotas in 1986. This meant that whale meat availability was reduced by 350 tonnes, and this shortfall could not be made up by seals or imported meat. The Sub-committee made no recommendations.

Denmark pointed out in the Technical Committee that it is carrying out research to get better information on the whale stocks, and proposed a catch limit for 1988 of 110 minke whales which could be revised next year. This was seconded by Iceland and Finland, the latter making a plea that the catch limit should not be exceeded. This proposal was agreed by the Technical Committee and adopted by the Commission.

Denmark asked for no change in the present fin whale catch limit of 10 which was also agreed.

16.2.5 Central Atlantic minke whales
The Scientific Committee welcomed substantial new material including that from aerial surveys in coastal Iceland waters, giving an adjusted population estimate of 27,000 whales. However, there are problems concerning the correction factors used in this analysis, and in the light of these uncertainties no consensus could be reached on a sightings estimate.

CPUE data on the multispecies Norwegian fishery prior to 1976 had not been submitted, but will be made available as soon as possible. Thus no advice could be offered.

The Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee was informed that Denmark had no intention of proposing changes in the aboriginal subsistence need for this stock, and the Technical Committee therefore agreed to recommend no change in the present figure of 12 minke whales, which was accepted by the Commission.

16.2.6 St Vincent and the Grenadines humpback whales
The Scientific Committee has not assessed the North Atlantic humpback stocks recently and earlier work was concerned mainly with the northern feeding aggregations. Photo-identification analyses suggested a total population of 5,500 although a different result was achieved using breeding ground data. The Bequia fishery is in the breeding areas.

The Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee reviewed the facts and circumstances of this whaling operation and accepted its aboriginal subsistence nature. It also drew attention to the implications of Schedule paragraph 14 concerning the taking of suckling calves or female whales accompanied by calves.

In the Technical Committee, St Vincent and the Grenadines presented its proposal to amend Schedule paragraph 13(b) by adding a new sub-paragraph 4:

The taking of 3 humpback whales a year is permitted by Bequians of St Vincent and the Grenadines, but only when the meat and products of such whales are to be used exclusively for local consumption in St Vincent and the Grenadines.

It also stated that it would in future make every effort to get the single remaining harpooner to comply with Schedule paragraph 14.

The proposal was seconded by Iceland and St Lucia and supported by Australia, Brazil, Denmark, Japan and Antigua and Barbuda, which also presented a clarification of its position in the meeting of the Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee. It was then agreed by the Technical Committee, but in presenting the proposal to the Commission, the Chairman of the Technical Committee suggested a small amendment of the wording to reflect more fully the intention of his Committee. This amendment took the form of some additional words at the start of the proposed new text:

For the seasons 1987/88 to 1989/90 the taking of 3² humpback whales a year is permitted...

Footnote² read

Each year this figure will be reviewed and if necessary amended on the basis of the advice of the Scientific Committee.

This amended proposal was then accepted by the Commission.

Norway welcomed the regularisation of this situation and recorded the fact that references to names in the Schedule amendment would be for geographical purposes alone, so as not to be in contravention of Article V.2(c) of the Convention. The Netherlands stressed the need for the Scientific Committee to give attention to this stock.

16.2.7 Small-type whaling in Japan's coastal seas
The Scientific Committee received two assessments of the Okhotsk Sea - West Pacific minke whale stock using revised catch statistics and sightings survey data, leading to abundance estimates of 9,621 and 12,988 using different parameters. The Scientific Committee had little confidence in the results of stock assessments based on these figures covering only a portion of the range of the stock and other complications with the survey methods. Additional analyses were therefore recommended. The CPUE data still contained anomalies as found last year. The Scientific Committee could give no additional advice on the classification of this stock nor the effects of a zero catch limit.

The Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee received information and documents to supplement information provided last year which explained the Japanese view of the similarity of its small-type minke whaling to whaling operations recognised as aboriginal subsistence. The Sub-committee was unable to make any recommendations to the Technical Committee.

In the Technical Committee, Japan reviewed the history of this whaling operation from the medieval net fishery to modern harpoon whaling. It emphasised the important position of raw whale meat in the dietary habits of the population in the area, and its part in community life. It saw many similarities to the Greenland and Soviet Bering Sea whaling which is permitted under the aboriginal subsistence procedures, and therefore proposed an amendment to Schedule paragraph 13(b) by the addition of the following sub-paragraph:

The taking by native whalers of minke whales from the Okhotsk Sea - West Pacific stock is permitted, but only when the meat and products are to be used exclusively for local consumption. The number of whales taken in accordance with this sub-paragraph shall not exceed the limit shown in Table 1.

(In this connection, the Government of Japan requested that the taking of 210 whales be permitted as the catch limit for the 1988 coastal season.)

This was seconded by Peru and Chile.

New Zealand questioned whether a country which had lost the right to vote could second a proposal, but Brazil saw a clear distinction between the two activities.

Sweden expressed concern over the introduction of commercial distribution of whale products into the aboriginal subsistence whaling category, but it was ready to review the matter. Norway spoke of the inappropriateness of attempting to fit small-type whaling into the Schedule terminology originally developed for factory ship and land based operations for large whales. It saw a distinction between large-scale industrial operations and family enterprises by isolated communities. Its suggestion for further discussion in a suitable forum was supported by Iceland. Switzerland was worried that members of highly industrialised societies could fall under the terms of Schedule paragraph 13, but welcomed further study, as did Finland, Australia and Netherlands.

The UK was also perturbed at the commercial aspect of the Japanese proposal, a view shared by the USA, while the People's Republic of China thought that a definition of aboriginal subsistence would help to clarify the problems.

India, Japan, Brazil, Mexico, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, France, Argentina, New Zealand and Netherlands contributed to a discussion of the most suitable way to form a group to discuss the issue - as an ad hoc working group, corresponding or meeting intersessionally, or within the existing Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee.

Japan introduced a proposal to establish an ad hoc working group to examine the terms and definitions of whaling for commercial purposes, aboriginal subsistence whaling, and other categories, to report to the 40th Annual Meeting. Australia, USA and the UK gave general support to this idea but thought the precise terms of reference could be usefully amended. Finally it was agreed by the Technical Committee that this working group should be a separate working group within the Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee; that it should correspond during the year; and meet before the next meeting of the Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee. Its terms of reference are to consider questions relating to the definition of aboriginal subsistence whaling as compared with other types of whaling for the purposes of the Schedule. Japan understood that these terms of reference would permit consideration of the appropriateness of the term 'aborigina1' in this context. Australia agreed to convene the Working Group, subject to government approval.

The discussion of the proposal on small-type whaling in Japan's coastal seas was then referred to the Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee for consideration after the Definitions Working Group has reported next year.

The Commission agreed to the establishment of this Working Group and its terms of reference, and referral of the Japanese coastal small-type whaling for consideration after the group had reported.

Japan asked that its request for the taking of 210 whales as the catch limit for the 1988 coastal season should be recorded in the report of the meeting, and the Netherlands asked that a statement be recorded that this was not discussed.

The Aboriginal Subsistcnce Whaling Sub-committee also received the report of the Humane Killing Working Group. In the section of the latter's report on aboriginal subsistence whaling operations it took note of the comments that it should be possible, recognising the nature of such operations, to strive further to reduce the pain and suffering of whales killed by improving the methods used.

Finally the Technical Committee took note of the difficulties caused by the very large size of the meeting of the Aboriginal Subsistence group. It invited delegations to restrict attendance to the minimum necessary. It recognised that the use of microphones would facilitate the conduct of that meeting, and requested advance notice of the delegations to assist in providing suitable facilities.

The thanks of the Technical Committee for the work in the Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Sub-committee of Mrs Blackwell (UK) as Chairman and Dr Swanson (USA) as Rapporteur were recorded. This sub-committee was attended by delegations from Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, People's Republic of China, Denmark, Iceland, Japan, Republic of Korea, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sweden, USSR, UK and USA.

_