(from "Chairman's Report of the Forty-Ninth Annual Meeting")
The meeting completed all but the final task, judging the merits of the results in terms of the Commission's Resolutions. That more general task was forwarded to the full Scientific Committee.
Five components of JARPA were reviewed: sighting surveys and abundance estimation; stock structure; biological parameter studies; marine ecosystem studies; and those addressing environmental change. For each component the Working Group considered the following: its background including original and additional research objectives; methodology of data collection; data analysis; results, and potential of results in the context of the objectives of JARPA and of stock management.
Japan's original objectives for the research had been:
Subsequently, as part of the natural evolution of the programme and in response to developing requirements, two further objectives had been added:
Outline of the JARPA research
Two feasibility studies had taken place in 1987/88 and 1988/89, with the
full-scale 16 year research commencing the following season and alternating
each season in Areas IV and V.
In 1995/96 and 1996/97 coverage was extended to Areas IIIE and VIW
respectively, for a limited period feasibility study of stock structure.
The full programme has two components: a sighting survey whose primary purpose
is the estimation of trends in abundance, and a sampling component to allow
biological parameter values to be estimated given also the abundance
information provided by the sighting survey.
In the programme as originally proposed, it was planned to take 825 animals in any one season from either Area IV or Area V. For two years of feasibility studies, 300 animals (with an allowance of ± 10%) were planned to be sampled in parts of Areas IV and V. Following the results of the feasibility studies, considerations of the balance between the expected precision of estimates of the mortality rate and the research capability available led to the decision to set the number of animals to be sampled each season to 300 with an allowance ± 10%. In the 1995/96 season additional samples of 100 animals with an allowance of ± 10% were planned for Area IIIE, and subsequently 100 ± 10% in Area VIW in the 1996/97 season, for studying stock structure.
Initially three vessels (plus the mother ship) had been employed, but a fourth had been added in 1995/96 to allow for an increase in searching effort in the sighting survey. This and some other changes during the progress of the programme had been made in response to comments from the Scientific Committee. Initially both dwarf and ordinary forms of the minke whales had been sampled, but sampling of the former had ceased in 1993/94. A total of 1,546 (Area IV), 1,546 (Area V), 110 (Area IIIE) and 110 (Area VIW) ordinary and 16 dwarf form minke whales had been sampled by the end of the 1996/97 season.
Scientific Committee Discussion
Discussion in the Scientific Committee had concentrated on two topics.
The first concerned issues of stock structure, the other, the problems
associated with obtaining representative samples and their implications for
the programme.
In view of the importance of this it was agreed to establish two Working
Groups:
Turning to more general issues, the Scientific Committee recalled that the review meeting had provided the following summary of its view on the JARPA objective of estimating biological parameters.
'The information produced by JARPA has set the stage for answering many questions about long term population changes regarding minke whales in Antarctic Areas IV and V. Not surprisingly, at this halfway point in the JARPA programme there are few definitive answers because of the time scale required to obtain sufficient age distribution and abundance data, and because of unanticipated problems in designing representative sampling regimes and in understanding the stock structure of minke whales in the Southern Hemisphere. For example, JARPA has already made a major contribution to understanding of certain biological parameters (e.g. direct measures of the age at sexual maturity) pertaining to minke whales in Areas IV and V, yet such analyses have not fully addressed potential problems related to stock structure.'
The question was raised as to whether these unexpected problems had been resolved, and if not, how this would effect the potential for the JARPA programme to meet its objectives.
With respect to stock structure, the representativeness of the sampling and bias in the JARPA estimates of abundance, unresolved questions still remain. There is an interaction among these questions as abundance estimates and the representativeness of sampling need to be evaluated relative to the stock being sampled.
The Scientific Committee noted that the problem of stock identity is common to almost all cetacean assessments. The data collected and the research carried out in the JARPA programme along with historic commercial catch samples are uniquely valuable in attacking this problem.
The Scientific Committee identified ten main areas to address these unresolved problems and work on all of these is either in progress, has recently been initiated or is at the planning stage.
With respect to the catch-at-age analyses, the JARPA review meeting concluded
'that there was merit in pursuing [certain] approaches ... further, but that estimates from such methods could not be considered reliable until difficulties associated with the estimates of abundance from JARPA ... have been resolved'.
The Scientific Committee noted that JARPA is at the halfway point and has provided substantial improvement in the understanding of stock structure. It is anticipated that as stock structure becomes better clarified, the information will be incorporated to provide analyses of biological parameters by stocks. For some of these analyses, this may not be straightforward.
In conclusion, the JARPA review had identified areas of additional future work that could contribute to resolving some of the unresolved and unexpected problems in sampling and stock structure that could limit the ability of JARPA to estimate biological parameters. Effort in response to all of these identified areas is being undertaken and this additional work may improve the value of the JARPA data and results.
Finally, the Scientific Committee agreed that none of the sampling and stock identity problems that had been identified either in the JARPA review or subsequently, would in principle prevent JARPA from achieving its objectives in terms of estimation of biological parameters. All of the identified problems appear to be addressable. Most members were optimistic that the JARPA data, in conjunction with additional work planned, would allow estimation of the biological parameters with reasonable levels of precision.
However, others thought that the problems associated with bias and the level of variance in the JARPA abundance estimates, and with interactions between catch-at-age analyses and uncertainty in stock structure, mean that it is not yet possible to determine whether reasonable levels of precision will ultimately be achieved.
Results in relation to IWC Resolutions
The Scientific Committee agreed to address the issue of the Commission's
Resolutions with respect to JARPA by reference to relevant comments from the
JARPA report and its discussions as summarised above.
It was noted that frequent sighting surveys in the same localities would facilitate estimation of interannual variability in local abundance which would in turn lead to improved overall results when combined with, for example, IDCR/SOWER and/or JSV data. However, improvements in methodology were suggested.
There was general agreement that the stock structure data were of value to management. However additional research was recommended. It was agreed that the information was relevant to improved Implementation Simulation Trials and, in the longer term, an improved RMP.
It was also agreed that the programme provided valuable information on a number of biological parameters (recruitment, natural mortality, decline in age at sexual maturity and reproduction). However, it identified the need for further work particularly in view of the difficulties in obtaining fully representative samples. Although there is much still to be done, it was agreed that many valuable results have been obtained. It was noted that the results in the short-term could be valuable with respect to several aspects of the RMP, provided certain identified problems were resolved.
Estimates of daily food consumption could be used with confidence for estimating total food consumption. However, there were concerns over the use of a body condition index for inferring information on the migration of minke whales with respect to timing of arrival on the feeding grounds and overwintering in high latitudes. The meeting agreed that the studies were contributing to Objective 2 above. However, additional studies were recommended. It was also noted that the information obtained would be of interest to CCAMLR and Southern Ocean GLOBEC.
The review meeting had agreed that the work was pertinent to some of the recommendations of the Pollution Workshop, although some concerns were expressed in the Scientific Committee about the extent to which the work on minke whales directly addressed one recommendation.
New or revised proposals
The Japanese Southern Hemisphere proposal is a continuation of the programme
discussed previously, and will sample 300 minke whales in Area IV and 100 in
half of Area III (± 10%).
The sampling in Area IIIE is to investigate inter-year variability.
The Japanese North Pacific programme is a continuation of the research begun in 1995 after a feasibility study in 1994, to examine whether sub-stocks of minke whales exist in the Okhotsk Sea - Western Pacific, and whether an additional stock exists in the central North Pacific.
The Scientific Committee referred the Commission to its previous comments on both these proposals.
14.2 Action arising
Norway commented that the JARPA programme has been repeatedly criticised every
year over the past ten years, but that the review meeting, comprising
influential members of the Scientific Committee, had reached an agreed report
by consensus.
The Netherlands recalled that at the 48th Meeting the majority of Commissioners thought that the Scientific Committee should not spend time considering Southern Hemisphere minke whales.
New Zealand pointed out the numbers of whales being taken under Special Permits in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary and the North Pacific, and that 3,000 had been caught in the first eight years of the Antarctic programme, with another eight years still to go. It noted the comment in the Scientific Committee report that the results from the JARPA programme are not required for management, and, citing the need for a moral compass, drew attention to the facts that there are many areas of unresolved problems, the research is taking place in a sanctuary, non-lethal research techniques are available and there should be a scientific direction. Austria agreed whilst accepting the data may be interesting for scientists. The USA concurred, wondering if the work is necessary as commercial whaling under the RMP is unlikely, while the polar areas are important in the climate change context. Monaco also expressed the view that lethal research is unnecessary, and was only occurring now because the Convention was written a long time ago. Chile, the UK and Spain supported these views.
Norway noted that the Scientific Committee had stated that results in the short term could be valuable to aspects of the RMP. Antigua and Barbuda expressed embarrassment at the way the Scientific Committee is treated by the Commission, hijacking the work of that Committee, and St Lucia stated that its reason for being in the Commission was the work of the Scientific Committee.
Japan concluded by commenting on the distinguished work of the Scientific Committee, and reviewed the reasons for its entry into Antarctic whaling after the Second World War when it suffered serious food shortages. It believed the Antarctic resources should be used by mankind in the face of a world food crisis in the 21st century.
Australia introduced a Resolution on Special Permit catches in the Southern Ocean by Japan. This was co-sponsored by Austria, Brazil, Finland, France, Germany, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Oman, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, UK and the USA. It recognised that although Japan's programme is strictly legal under Article VIII of the Convention, science should endeavour to adopt the highest standards and that there are civilised limits to the pursuit of knowledge: killing should only occur where critically important information is otherwise unavailable, and that the scale and nature of these catches subverts the sanctuary and the moratorium. The Resolution notes that the JARPA review concluded that the results are not required for management and this advice from the Scientific Committee should be heeded.
Japan responded by referring to Article VIII and the fact that the Southern Ocean Sanctuary exists regardless of the status of the stocks. It views these Resolutions as an affront, because of the quality and quantity of the research which the JARPA review identified as having potential for management. Antigua and Barbuda commented on an attack earlier in the meeting on the Scientific Committee and considered that a vote for this Resolution is an indictment of the Scientific Committee: it called for stronger links with the Animals Committee of CITES.
The Resolution shown in Appendix 5 was then put to the vote and adopted with 18 votes in favour, 11 against and 2 abstentions.
The Netherlands then introduced a Resolution on Special Permit catches in the North Pacific by Japan, co-sponsored by Austria, Australia, Brazil, Finland, France, Germany, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, UK and the USA. It noted that despite previous Resolutions there had been no changes by Japan, and called for non-lethal biopsy sampling and analysis of existing samples, believing that stock identification is not a critical need, and reiterated the request to Japan to refrain from the programme and use only non-lethal methods.
Japan noted that many of the same points were being repeated. The identification and mixing of sub-stocks is important, only a small number of whales was being taken and it was not deterred by a Resolution which was a breach of its sovereign rights to help management based on scientific findings. Norway noted the present Resolution has no reference to the Scientific Committee and recalled that last year there was overwhelming support in the Scientific Committee for this research as a help in management, and it is also critically important for determining the role of whales in the ecosystem.
The Resolution given in Appendix 6 was then adopted with 15 votes in favour, 10 against and 6 abstentions.
_