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

The first part of the meeting comprised keynote presentations, primarily to provide an overview of the different disciplines represented at the Workshop. The Workshop then considered the effects of chemical pollutants on cetaceans, both direct and indirect. Considerable time was spent by the Workshop in examining the research implications of the review and the implications of the Workshop itself for the future work of the Scientific Committee. It was stressed that the impetus generated by its report and recommendations should not be lost and the Scientific Committee should consider ways to ensure that this does not happen. It made a number of suggestions and also a large number of recommendations, largely related to further research. However, it identified a number of recommendations directly affecting the Scientific Committee and Commission.

Despite a lack of direct evidence for cetaceans, the Workshop believed that there are sufficient data on the adverse effects of pollutants on the health of other marine mammal and terrestrial species to warrant concern for cetaceans. However, the report and its recommendations show that a considerable amount of fundamental research is needed before it will be possible to adequately address the question of the effects of chemical pollutants on all cetaceans.

Notwithstanding the cautionary note that it is often not appropriate to extrapolate from one species to another, the Workshop believed that it is clear that if any progress is to be made within a reasonable time frame, a multidisciplinary, multinational focussed programme of research is required that concentrates on those species/areas where there is most chance of success. The Scientific Committee and the Commission was strongly urged to consider ways to facilitate the development and execution of such research.

The Workshop considered three species in certain areas to be particularly suitable: the bottlenose dolphin; the harbour porpoise; and the white whale. In summary they have the following characteristics: a reasonable sample size can be obtained; they are found over a wide 'pollution' gradient; considerable information is already available; and animals held and bred in captivity provide potential for baseline studies and experimental investigation.

In discussion of the Workshop report by the Scientific Committee, it was pointed out that the Workshop was not suggesting that other species, such as minke whales, should not be studied in the context of pollutants, but rather that for progress to be made in the short-term, a concerted effort should be made on those species/areas where there is most chance of success. However, all directed studies are of great value, particularly in areas such as the Southern Hemisphere, where there is relatively little information.

The Scientific Committee commended the comprehensive and thorough review carried out by the Workshop. It particularly drew the Commission's attention to the recommendations and urged member nations to ensure that the availability of the report is made known to relevant institutions in their countries and that the results of the Workshop reach researchers in the wide range of disciplines noted in the report. It also requested that the Commission examines ways to ensure that the multinational multidisciplinary programme referred to above is carried out, including the possibility of funding a contract study.

Finally, the Scientific Committee noted that the Commission had not budgeted for the Workshop and that without the provision of funding by one member government, Norway, and one NGO, the Environmental Investigation Agency Charitable Trust, the Workshop could not have taken place. The Commission should consider the implications of this for the Scientific Committee's future work.

In the Commission, the Russian Federation asked for elaboration concerning the lack of direct evidence of the effects of pollutants on cetaceans, and from the reply given by the Chairman of the Scientific Committee on the lack of direct causal links, drew the conclusion that there is no basis of evidence for such effects.

Climate change
Last year the Scientific Committee produced a preliminary set of topics to be considered at a Symposium/Workshop to consider the effects of climate change (global warming and ozone depletion) on cetaceans. An intersessional Steering Group was established to develop plans further, and its report, modified to take into account comments made in the Scientific Committee this year, was presented to the Commission.

The Scientific Committee emphasised that the success of the Workshop is dependent on collaboration with relevant intergovernmental organisations (e.g. IOC, GLOBEC, CCAMLR, UNEP), and expertise from disciplines outside those normally present within the Committee. The Steering Group now included representatives from UNEP, CCAMLR and GLOBEC. The Steering Group will identify organisations who should be advised of the Workshop by the Secretariat. The Scientific Committee urges member governments to send relevant scientists to the Workshop and recommends that adequate funding be provided to invite necessary expertise.

The Russian Federation, because of its concern about the financial implications without a clear understanding of the work to be done, asked which additional disciplines the Scientific Committee would like to have involved. The Chairman of that Committee gave as examples experts in atmospheric and oceanographic studies, and biological oceanography, directly addressing climate change and the environment, and specifically the relevant lead authors in the forthcoming report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The Chairman of the Commission observed that the budget for the Workshop had been approved and expected a certain open-endedness of approach.

Mediterranean Sea
Monaco commented on the fact that the Mediterranean Sea is poorly represented in the Commission. Monaco, France and Italy have agreed to establish a sanctuary for cetaceans in their waters of this enclosed sea, which is particularly rich in whales and resembles the Antarctic in its food chains. It asked that the Scientific Committee provide advice on research priorities in this area.

18.2 Action arising
The Commission approved the Scientific Committee's recommendations and passed on the request from Monaco.

Norway, on behalf of the USA, Spain, UK and New Zealand, introduced a Resolution on the environment and whale stocks. It recalled the development of the Commission's interest by way of Resolutions on the marine environment and the recommendations from the Bergen Workshop on Chemical Pollution and Cetaceans, sought to facilitate research and information exchange on this topic and urged governments to send relevant experts to the climate change meeting.

Sweden also wanted to co-sponsor this Resolution, as did Switzerland which suggested with the USA that it be adopted by consensus, a view shared by Germany, France Netherlands, Mexico, Austria, India, South Africa, Finland, Denmark and Japan. The Resolution so approved is shown in Appendix 11.

_