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

It reviewed an extract from the Scientific Committee Report presented by its Chairman summarising the Committee's work on whalewatching. He noted that the Committee's progress was hampered by the modest response to the request for information in IWC Resolution 1994-14. The Scientific Committee found the report from a workshop held in Italy very useful, and relied on it as its primary document to address whalewatching.

In considering a framework for future guidelines on whalewatching, the Working Group received four papers. New Zealand set out the scientific rationale for its whalewatching regulations. New Zealand emphasised that its whalewatching operations may be unique, given the close proximity to shore of sperm whales at Kaikoura and the particular habits of sperm whales in comparison to baleen whales. Therefore its regulations may not necessarily provide an exact model for all countries.

The UK presented an update on the whalewatching industry. Between 1991 and 1994, increases were noted in numbers of countries with whalewatching industries, in numbers of people who made whalewatching trips, and in direct and total revenues from whalewatching operations.

Although Japan reiterated its view that whalewatching is outside the purview of the IWC, it presented a progress report on the investigation of whalewatching in Japan. It stressed the need for scientific research on which to base whalewatching regulations, as well as the need to balance whalewatching activities with other human uses of the ocean, especially fishing. Japan also presented a summary of Japanese research on Bryde's whales, a target of whalewatching off Kochi.

The UK then introduced the report from the Workshop in Italy convened to assist scientists who study cetaceans in giving advice to managers on the regulation of whalewatching operations. Highlights of the report are possible management objectives, a discussion of links between short-term effects and long-term changes and a scientific framework to guide the formulation of rules. The Workshop, which was essentially scientific in its focus, had expressed no view on whether 'rules' should be statutory, regulatory or guidelines for industry practice.

The Secretary agreed to distribute an index of all whalewatching documents on file with the IWC.

In reviewing developments relating to all aspects of whalewatching under the Commission's responsibilities, the UK stated that management of whalewatching is a matter for coastal states, as recognised in Resolution 1994-14, but believed the IWC can provide useful guidance to coastal states. While local circumstances must influence particular rules, it is helpful to have a general framework. The UK therefore proposed that the Secretariat circulate the relevant pages of the Italian Workshop Report to interested countries, and request comments particularly on the 'rules of engagement' proposed. Responses could then form the basis for discussion and development of guidance from the IWC at subsequent meetings. The USA endorsed this proposal, and added that the Scientific Committee should also be requested to continue its work on whalewatching. Japan pointed out the need for a better scientific basis for whalewatching guidelines, and noted that some endangered species need higher levels of protection than more abundant populations. New Zealand suggested asking the Scientific Committee whether different guidance should be developed for toothed and baleen whales, given their distinctive behaviours and life histories. A distinction could also be made between different areas (e.g. feeding, breeding, transit).

Under any other business, Japan, noting the lack of response to the requests in Resolution 1994-14, suggested that the Working Group might meet only every second or third year. The Chairman noted that, given the new requests for comments on the report of the Workshop held in Italy and the proposal to develop guidance, there was a need to meet in 1996, but said that annual meetings might not necessarily be required thereafter.

In the Commission, Mexico pointed out that there are some inaccuracies in the UK document submitted to the Working Group with respect to the species and revenue involved for Mexico, and that very little income enters that country from the operations run from the USA.

Australia intimated that it will hold a small workshop and conference on the development of its domestic regulatory framework for whalewatching in July and will submit a report to the IWC.

20.2 Action arising
The Commission agreed that the Secretary should circulate the pages identified from the Workshop held in Italy to all Commissioners for comment, making it clear that it is not an official IWC document and that its contents are not necessarily endorsed by the IWC or by member countries. The responses received will form the basis of the work of the Working Group when it meets again next year. It also accepted the suggestion of the Netherlands to repeat the request for information from Resolution 1994-14.

_