9. COMMISSION'S COMPETENCE TO SET CATCH LIMITS FOR BAIRD'S BEAKED WHALE IN THE NORTH PACIFIC (1990)

9. COMMISSION'S COMPETENCE TO SET CATCH LIMITS FOR BAIRD'S BEAKED WHALE IN THE NORTH PACIFIC

(from "Chairman's Report of the Forty-Second Meeting")

The USA voiced its concerns over multispecies fisheries which take cetaceans and particularly those species not included in Table 3 of the Schedule. It proposed that this agenda Item should be changed next year to 'Commission's competence for cetaceans not listed in Table 3 of the Schedule'. The Netherlands, Australia, Sweden, UK and the Federal Republic of Germany all expressed their support. New Zealand also gave support, believing that the IWC does have regulatory competence for small cetaceans, and it quoted from the conclusions of the 12th (1960) Annual Meeting the Commission's view that 'all whales were covered by the wording of the Convention, but individual species when named in the Schedule to the Convention were subject to specific conservation measures'.

The USA emphasised that it only wanted to broaden the debate to include those species subject to commercial exploitation, and in response to a question from Japan, indicated that this is part of a process of debate to urge non-member states engaged in commercial catching to join the IWC.

Japan reiterated its position, based on the Preamble to the Convention, that the IWC's competence is limited to the large whale species. It also referred to the limiting nature it saw in the Annex of Nomenclature and believed that a regional approach might be better. Denmark, Mexico and Iceland also recorded their reservations.

It was agreed to pass this matter to the plenary meeting with the reservations recorded.

In the plenary session the USA and Japan repeated their statements of position, Japan pointing out that there are 139 coastal states in the world, but only 35 in the IWC (of 36 members). It doubted if the Commission was the appropriate body to deal with the many other species. It thought the Convention Working Group should discuss the matter, and recorded its reservation.

Denmark believed that a diplomatic conference was the place for such decisions. Mexico shared this view and Iceland recalled its reservation in the Technical Committee. Spain also expressed its reservation.

The UK supported the USA proposal, pointing out that the whalers were turning to the smaller species because of the IWC ban on commercial whaling. Sweden, Switzerland, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Australia, the Federal Republic of Germany, Brazil and Seychelles also supported the USA suggestion to broaden the discussion under this agenda Item.

The People's Republic of China identified its own national legislation protecting rare and endangered species, and suggested that the IWC should make a recommendation to the states concerned to issue their own laws to control their own natural resources.

France recalled that similar debates recur each year because of questions of principle over the competence of the Commission. It believed it is necessary to find a practical way to tackle the matter if some species are in danger.

St Lucia explained that it must refer this issue to the Fisheries Desk of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States of which it is a member.

Because Denmark and Japan could not accept the USA proposal, the Chairman suggested proceeding to a vote. New Zealand then intervened to propose deferring a vote until a Resolution it and other delegations were sponsoring on small cetaceans (see Agenda Item 14) had been discussed. The USA seconded this proposal which was agreed by the meeting.

At the Commission's final session, in order to save time, the USA suggested and the meeting agreed to keep the Item in its original wording on the agenda for next year with the recommendation of the USA pending.