Whale hunting worse than previously thought! (1 Viewer)

[Max Leung]

Let's hope they don't discover a better Viagra in Panda nuts

Now THAT is an oxymoron.

Priceless.

As a kid I remember a little blurb about lipstick and other cosmetics being made from blubber, although that isn't true anymore. I believe they still eat whale in Japan. I wouldn't be surprised if they sell whale flesh to the Chinese superstition market. :rolleyes

Also, some of the inuit in Canada are allowed to hunt whale (limit of a dozen a year? Can't remember). I recall that they have been given permission to use modern whaling equipment instead of hand-thrown harpoons in a canoe.

 

[Eric_L]

Nuke who? The French or the Whales? We've already nuked the Japanese.

Nuke the whales, of course!

but now that you mention the French......

 

[David Brown Eyes]

Oh ya! go Greenpeace. Those morons can't stop Japan and Norway from killing hundreds of whales but they sure can trample on the rights of the Maka tribe, for killing one..

Greenpeace makes me ill.

http://www.greenpeacefoundation.com/...cfm?breakId=31

 

[Julian Reville]

A federal appeals court ruled Friday that the Makah Tribe could not resume gray whale hunts

David, it sounds to me that your beef should be more with the court than with Greenpeace.

Whale-killing, clubbing baby harp seals, killing elephants for their tusks, killing rhinos for their horns.........

"I can't define obscenity, but I know it when I see it."

 

[David Brown Eyes]

If you look into the situation you will see that Greenpeace lead the charge to stop it. There is also some wonderfull footage of Greenpeace interfearing with the hunt.

Now if Greenpeace were truely effective at stoping the sensless destruction I would support them. Unfortunately their and others track record of going after "the little guy" simply because they can shows their true colors.

 

[Max Leung]

clubbing baby harp seals

It's hard for me to believe if that is true anymore...there was a scandal several years ago where it was found that the news footage you see of men beating seals was staged Michael-Moore-style for the cameras. The reporter allegedly paid the men to club them while the cameras were rolling -- otherwise they wouldn't have bothered.

But a cursory check with Google indicates that it really does happen:

http://washingtontimes.com/world/200...4837-5322r.htm

Hmmm who to believe?

As for Greenpeace, wouldn't the loss of the ship Rainbow Warrior be a good reason why they aren't as effective as they used to be?

 

[Julian Reville]

Hmmm who to believe?

With the veritable plethora of information and mis-information on the internet, that is definitely true. But baby harp seals were brutally slaughtered. I am as sure of this as I am that I will never win the Mega Millions.


Time to come out of the closet

I joined Greenpeace way back in the 70s, precisely because I wanted to make a statement about senseless killing of animals. I also have joined Defenders of Wildlife. Both groups do lots of good things. I won't try to defend everything Greenpeace has done as perfectly logical or even nice. Sometimes an extreme action is needed to make a point; as long as no one is physically harmed, I am usually OK with it

I can see no reason why someone needs to kill a whale, a baby harp seal, an elephant, a rhino, just because his/her ancestors did. Are we still living in the 19th century?

 

[David Brown Eyes]

It is not senseless Julian. The one whale that was killed provided 15 pounds of meat for each member of the Makah. The bones were used to make tools and artifacts that were used to teach todays children about themselves their history and culture. Maybe instil just a small amount of pride in who they are. They did not and did not want to kill dozens and dozens of whales for commercial reasons. They were not any threat to the grey whale population.

So why target them?

I to cringe at the senseless killing of animals, but I also believe in apropriate use and management. Many times that management involves culling the herds so to speak. The killing of animals for "vanity" ie baby seals, or for sport sickens me just as much as you and I am glad that there are laws against that.

Yet when do those laws cross over and become more damaging than helpfull. When you see rageing forest fires that threaten your very home, or when you watch Yellowstone buffalo slowly die of starvation. Radical conservation laws take on a whole new meaning. That is truely senseless.

 

[Eric_L]

That is truly senseless

Speaking of senseless, has anyone mentioned Greenpeace?

heh. Really, if you looked at where your donated dollars really end up you'd probably start paying the seal-clubbers to go after the Greenpeace higher-uppers.

Environmental terrorists, vandalism, trespassing, mis-information and bullying are just a few of their more reprehensible tactics.

They are an example of what started out as a reasonable idea (for those of you who forget it was restricting nuclear power) and then was taken over by zealous activists who are anti-whatever is in vogue. Some of their ideas have merit, but they discredit them with their intolerant zealotry. Doubt me? Wear a fur coat to one of their meetings. They'll crucify you while wearing their leather shoes.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Have you not read the posts immediately prior to yours? Please, no baiting in this thread. Shut-down is imminent.

 

[Julian Reville]

Now that we have all cooled off

I heard on the radio this morning that Iceland is sharpening its' harpoons in preparation for resuming whaling. They plan to slaughter 38 this year, and 500 next year, all in the name of "research".

This is really starting to piss me off. I'm ready to hijack a warship and go after these guys.




Would this be overkill?

 

[Max Leung]

Background on Iceland resuming whaling under the auspices of research:

Iceland bids to resume whaling

It (a newspaper) quoted the Fisheries Minister, Arni Matthiesen, as saying the aim was to collect data on "the impact of whales on the ocean ecosystem".

Research loophole

He said Iceland's scientists would investigate cetaceans' diet, their distribution and numbers, and their interaction with other marine species

Interaction with other marine species? How do they figure this out when they're dead? Unless they're talking about the whale's food, or looking for giant squid attack scars or something.

A lot can be learned by tagging whales, and by following them with properly-equipped mini-subs. I suppose you'd need to kill a whale to understand its diet, but I'd have figured that they'd have this information from much earlier whaling expeditions!

Using the US Navy's "spy buoys" to listen to whalesong has been extremely useful in determining whale migration patterns. Why can't Iceland and Japan do the same thing?

I find the "whaling for research" argument very weak...scientists have already made significant discoveries without needing to kill hundreds of whales. What Iceland intends to do is redundant.

 

[Julian Reville]

Iceland has also rejected the listing of the Northern right whale, so rare in the eastern Atlantic it is sighted only a few times each decade.

Norway, Iceland, Japan. They are the enemy! Attack!

 

[Jack Briggs]

Julian, I admire your passion and am with you in spirit. But let's not categorically dismiss entire countries no matter how odious some of their policies may be.

 

[Julian Reville]

Sorry, Jack :b

I promise that once I get my hands on The Mighty Mo I will only bombard coastal cities that have whaling ships.

 

[Lance Nichols]

Although I somewhat agree with both Inuit and other traditiona people having SOME inherit/treaty -right to hunt, I do not think they should. Some of these species are so endangered, that reducing the limited gene pool even a small amount will push species to the bring, and maybe even over.

What I fear with legally mandated traditional hunts is that it is part of a slippery slope. Say a people start with killing one or two whales per season. Soon the resistance has lessoned to this, and outside economic pressures are increased to add to the slaughter an other two or four per season. After all, they can sell that meat to the Japanese, or whomever at a very high premium, thanks to it being legally sanctioned.

This is one of the reason I personally support the TOTAL elimination of ALL whaling. The other reason is more "sentimental". Of all the species inhabiting Terra with us, I think the likelihood of cetaceans being intelligent, sentient creatures with intelligence on par with Homo sapiens is very high.

There is little, if any, real need to hunt whales in this day and age. All products traditionally derived from Whales, can be produced with modern synthetics. This includes ivory, as synthetic versions of that can be obtained and worked much like the natural product. You can teach youngsters via oral tradition, and “hunting” the traditions of a people with out the need to finalize the act. In fact, if you want to participate in traditional hunting, why not eliminate the harpoon and replace it with a TDR tag?

 

[Steve Ridges]

As I recall, didn't a Greenpeace boat actually hit a whale while trying to scare it away from the Maka hunters? I get a twisted little kick out of that

 

[Chris Lockwood]

Don't worry- the Enterprise will be coming back in time to save the whales.

What are the uses for the whales that are hunted, anyway?

 

[Jack Briggs]

Chris, that's the million-dollar question no one seems able to answer! Meanwhile, the creatures' numbers dwindle.

 

[Chris Lockwood]

I would hope the whale hunters could answer it- there has to be some reason beyond just wanting to reduce the whale population.