(from "Chairman's Report of the Fiftieth Annual Meeting")
In discussion of the Commission's Resolution last year (IWC Resolution 1997-5), it was noted that it did include information on the potential for JARPA to improve management. However, for clarity, the Scientific Committee agreed to repeat its full statement from last year (Rep. int. Whal. Commn 48:101) on this matter:
'while JARPA results were not required for management under the RMP, they had the potential to improve it in the following ways: (1) reductions in the current set of plausible scenarios considered in Implementation Simulation Trials; and (2) identification of new scenarios to which future Implementation Simulation Trials will have to he developed (e.g. the temporal component of stock structure). The results of analyses of JARPA data could be used in this way perhaps to increase the allowed catch of minke whales in the Southern Hemisphere, without increasing the depletion risk above the level indicated by the existing Implementation Simulation Trials of the RMP for these minke whales.'
JAPAN - NORTH PACIFIC
The Scientific Committee noted that a number of documents that incorporated
information from JARPN had been presented and were discussed.
Review of new or revised proposals
JARPA - SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE
The 1998/99 JARPA research plan is a continuation of the programme that has
been extensively discussed previously by the Scientific Committee.
It is the 10th full-scale survey of a 16-year research programme.
The survey will cover Area V and the western half of Area VI to focus on the
issue of stocks within the framework of the four major objectives of the
programme.
The survey period is the same as in previous years and the sample size is 400 ± 10%. One research vessel, three sampling/sightings vessels and one dedicated sightings vessel will be used. Participation by international scientists is welcomed.
The Scientific Committee noted that the addition of quantitative echo-sounder equipment to the dedicated sightings vessel this year will provide the added capability of determining the distribution and abundance of food species including Antarctic krill. The effect of using such equipment on sightings surveys was briefly considered. Some members noted that information provided by JARPA could be of significant value for the elucidation of the effects of environmental change on whales and the Antarctic ecosystem.
JAPAN - NORTH PACIFIC
The programme, which began in 1995 after a feasibility study in 1994, is to
examine (1) whether sub-stocks exist of the Okhotsk Sea - Western Pacific stock
(O stock) of minke whales, and (2) whether an additional stock (W stock) exists
in the central part of the North Pacific, and if it does, the rate of mixing
with O stock.
One hundred animals will be sampled in two or three areas among sub-Areas 7,
8, 9, 11 and 12.
With regard to the sampling area in the 1998 survey, it was reported that if it seems difficult to get permission from the Government of the Russian Federation to operate in its waters, sub-Areas 7 and 8 (in May and June) and 11 (in July) were to be covered.
The Scientific Committee noted that it had not reviewed this proposal in detail since 1994.
It was stated that the programme could be terminated after the completion of the 1999 cruise if the Scientific Committee agreed that the research objectives had been adequately met by that time. After some discussion, the Scientific Committee agreed that a comprehensive review of JARPN should be planned for 2000. If the programme is extended to the year 2000 or thereafter, a detailed and thorough research proposal should be submitted for review. The Government of Japan would elaborate the programme for 1999, taking into account the comments made during the meeting and analyses of the 1998 data; it would circulate this to the members of the Scientific Committee prior to departure of the cruise.
14.2 Action arising
Japan commented that it was pleased that the JARPA programme was contributing
to research on resources in the Antarctic, and that at the review meeting
scientists had appreciated the results. Concerning the North Pacific, it
noted the attempts to solve the stock structure problems.
On behalf of Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Norway, St Lucia and St
Vincent and The Grenadines it introduced a Resolution concerning Special
Permits which reaffirmed the rights of Contracting Governments under Article
VIII of the Convention, and the need for scientific information for the proper
conservation and management of whale resources. It hoped for consensus on this.
The Netherlands had no objection to the operative clauses but proposed deleting a preambular paragraph which it thought did not correctly reflect the conclusions of the Scientific Committee concerning the potential for management from the results, and the use of non-lethal research. Australia and New Zealand voiced their opposition to lethal research and Switzerland, Sweden, Italy, Finland and India supported the Netherlands.
Antigua and Barbuda pointed out that the text was a direct quote from the Scientific Committee, and St Lucia spoke of the need for a lethal take for some research.
Denmark said it was against scientific whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary. The Chairman of the Scientific Committee pointed to his Committee's views on this issue. The People's Republic of China spoke of the current technology and advocated the study of research methods to reduce lethal methods.
The Resolution was then put to the vote and defeated with 10 votes in favour to 19 against, and 5 abstentions.
Switzerland explained its abstention because it is opposed to large-scale lethal research in the Sanctuary but had no problems with the operative paragraph. South Africa indicated the same.
Monaco, on behalf of Australia, Brazil, India, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand and the UK, put forward a Resolution on whaling under Special Permit which:
It spoke of the concern over lethal research as expressed in a letter from a number of scientists, the large numbers of whales taken and the appearance of whale meat in commercial markets. It commented that scientists do not operate in a vacuum and that the science of whales has advanced over the past 50 years.
Antigua and Barbuda could not support the Resolution, mentioning the merits of JARPA, the lack of non-lethal means to address certain issues and noting lethal military research. Norway commented on the necessity to conduct multi-species research for interactions in fisheries.
New Zealand commented on the many signatures on petitions opposed to scientific whaling, reflecting the depth of feeling that there is no need to kill whales to carry out research. It believed that there should be an ethical review and that research must be guided by a moral compass. Italy noted that two of its eminent scientists had signed the letter referred to, and also believed that lethal research must be brought to an end. Denmark stated that it is opposed to scientific whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary and would support the Resolution, while the USA was increasingly concerned over research whaling and strongly opposed unnecessary lethal research.
Antigua and Barbuda proposed adding a paragraph that the Commission 'note the grave concern for the lethal use of cetaceans for military research purposes'. Dominica seconded this, but New Zealand thought the amendment concerned research outside the Convention which should be separated and properly presented. Denmark restated that it believes that small cetaceans are outside IWC competence.
Japan, on a point of order, requested Antigua and Barbuda to withdraw the amendment, but the latter asked for it to be put to the vote, when it was defeated by 6 votes in favour to 16 against, with 12 abstentions. The Resolution shown in Appendix 5 was then adopted by 17 votes in favour to 9 against, with 8 abstentions.
South Africa explained its abstention as it objects to high levels of lethal scientific sampling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary, but had doubts about extrapolating these objections to sampling in the North Pacific. Antigua and Barbuda voted against because it believes Japan's research is completely legal and useful, while Japan regretted the increasing number who ignore its rightful scientific activities and stating that it was also concerned about the manner in which the incorporation of ethical matters was being introduced.
_