Whaling: Right or Wrong?

[Humuhumunukunukuapua'a]

well, here you're reading my mind and telling me what my motives are for
making a statment.

but even so, you're wrong factually. i clearly stated that they were taking Minkes
and Fin:



http://www.scubaboard.com/showpost.php?p=1423641&postcount=16

OK, am I misreading something in this quote from you a few posts back?

... not in danger of over-hunting for the simple reason that no one
except for the Japanese, the Icelanders, and the Norwegians is going
after them, and then only after the minke, for about 2,200 specimens to be
taken. that out of a total population of (a conservative) 700,000 does not
constitute "over hunting."

What did you mean by "only after the Minke"? By that you meant "Minke and Fin"?

I'm not trying to imply any motivation on your part. But your original assertions were based on your statement that they were taking only Minke. But when I mention the Fin, you're OK with that, too...but only 10 individuals. I see in that attitude a slippery slope toward allowing more harvest next year of a species that clearly hasn't recovered from devastating overharvest. Or a different species...as long as it's just a little.

Historically, whaling practices have been completely unsustainable. But, let me guess, this time we have it all right? Just like introducing mongoose to Hawaii would cause no problems? Maybe you think the analogy doesn't apply because we just know SO MUCH MORE now? Name one time that mankind has EVER been correct in the assertion that changing an ecosystsem would cause that ecosystem no long-term harm, because I can think of a lot of times we've made that assumption only to find the opposite is true.

I hardly think taking *any* members of a population of slow-breeding large mammals that number less than 100,000 individuals is widely considered a good thing in terms of sustainability. Maybe you're OK with it, but I bet you could find a lot of scientists who would disagree.

 

[Humuhumunukunukuapua'a]

I'd also find it easier to listen to if I didn't know that many of the anti whale hunting lobby are quite prepared to jump into their gas-guzzling 4X4s and rush off to kill deer any chance they get, or as someone already pointed out, spear massive groupers that actually are endangered, or decimate North Atlantic tuna stocks etc etc etc.

You make some good points about cultural tolerance, but much of your justification is sort of like the above. IE:

1) People criticizing whaling do bad things themselves
2) Therefore, whaling is acceptable

It just doesn't follow. I don't want people killing endangered grouper or killing off all the tuna either. I don't want them clubbing seals for furs. Even if I DID want that stuff, whaling would be a bad thing for the world at large, as your argument implies.

In other words, you are defending the actions of Japan by citing the abhorrent practices of other cultures, and using that to justify Japan's abhorrent practices. It does not logically follow.

Put simply, two wrongs don't make a right.

If you want to start a thread about groupers, tuna or conservation in general, then we can discuss those topics there. But this thread is in fact about Japan's whaling practices, and if we are to get anywhere with the discussion, then Japanese whaling needs to be discussed on its own. The fact that other cultures commit equal or greater environmental crimes, while totally true, is simply not relevant.

 

[gangrel441]

If you want to start a thread about groupers, tuna or conservation in general, then we can discuss those topics there. But this thread is in fact about Japan's whaling practices, and if we are to get anywhere with the discussion, then Japanese whaling needs to be discussed on its own. The fact that other cultures commit equal or greater environmental crimes, while totally true, is simply not relevant.

If you want to start a thread about the taking of 10 fin whales by the Japanese as an environmental crime, then we can discuss that there. But this thread was started about the taking of 2,200 Minke whales, which are not an endangered species and does not constitute an environmental crime.

 

[BigBoB]

My wife (who is Japanese) says that it tastes like horse......I will probably never find out.

 

[Kim]

Put simply, two wrongs don't make a right.

Not true, I'm not saying that. I'm simply questioning the credentials of those that think they know what is right or wrong in the first place.
Personally I don't think the Japanese have any reason to be ashamed because they eat whale and I know for a fact that all the Japanese I know - and that's a lot as I live here - aren't. As has already been demonstrated earlier in the thread - they aren't doing anything that is hurting the whale populations.
In my book if you eat meat or fish you have no moral position to attack or criticize the Japanese because they eat whale. Take the log out of your own eye before you try to remove the speck from someone else's.

It's not in Japans' interests to destroy whale stocks - they'd have none left to eat if that happened. Japanese marine management is among the most advanced in the world. It's those who are trying to make the destruction argument based on no scientific data, but pure hearsay and wishful thinking, that need to check their facts. Look at the links Andy provided earlier and it should be quite clear to a rational person that the Japanese aren't destroying anything.

We have eaten animals and fish since the beginning. We have learned to husband and farm them to have sustainability of supply. The few times that we have been greedy we've lost out badly but often conservation measures have been taken to rectify the situation before it was too late. Just look at the North Sea Fisheries for an example of such legislation. It was most of the countries in the world over fishing whale that reduced the numbers until a ban had to be called. As someone already pointed out those fleets often weren't even taking whale for food - but for oil and glue etc. Now whale stocks are in recovery and the numbers that the Japanese take isn't going to hurt that recovery at all.

 

[Captain CaveMan]

Wow some one has the same point of view. ever thing she saying sound familiar this was posted before..pages 1-7..

 

[Humuhumunukunukuapua'a]

Personally I don't think the Japanese have any reason to be ashamed because they eat whale and I know for a fact that all the Japanese I know - and that's a lot as I live here - aren't.

Well, I think they should be ashamed...nearly every other former whaling nation has ceased whaling. What makes the Japanese more entitled to this resource than anyone else? It's only because of the restraint and conservation-mindedness of the rest of the world (on this particular matter) that you can even argue that Japan's practices are not harmful.

Furthermore, I think the Japanese who eat whale should be ashamed that their country uses some loophole in International Law to go and kill whales, claiming a scientific need, only to in fact serve them up for dinner. It's completely disingenuous.

As has already been demonstrated earlier in the thread - they aren't doing anything that is hurting the whale populations.

Hmm...killing them isn't hurting them? I remain unconvinced. They're doing more harm to the Minke and Fin whale population than any other nation on Earth in fact.

In my book if you eat meat or fish you have no moral position to attack or criticize the Japanese because they eat whale. Take the log out of your own eye before you try to remove the speck from someone elses.

Well, since I don't eat those things, I guess I am allowed my opinion under your rules. However, even if I did eat meat, I would be entitled to that opinion. Eating domesticated animals raised for the slaughter, or even deer, whose populations are enormous because of hunting out their predators is simply not the same as hunting whales for food. These are animals with a slow reproduction rate about which we know very little compared to a herd of cattle.

We have eaten animals and fish since the beginning. We have learned to husband and farm them to have sustainability of supply. The few times that we have been greedy we've lost out badly but often conservation measures have been taken to rectify the situation before it was too late.

Few times??? With all due respect, I think you need to take another look at mankind's devastation of natural resources over the years. Name one time that industrialized harvest of a natural resource didn't lead to overharvesting, except (as is the case here) when mandated by law. I think you and I both know that Japan would harvest more whales if they thought they could get away with it. In fact it's really a very few times that conservation measures have been put in place quickly enough, and with enough power to actually turn the situation around.

Now whale stocks are in recovery and the numbers that the Japanese take isn't going to hurt that recovery at all.

Well it sure isn't helping...sounds like a rationalization to me.

 

[Kim]

Well it sure isn't helping...sounds like a rationalization to me.

Only the countries that don't actually eat whale gave up hunting them. If it's not for food there is no real reason to - we get oil and glue from other sources these days.

Within all your statements about the damage that they are doing I have yet to see you offer any evidence to support your argument. I'm glad to hear you don't eat or use any animal or fish products yourself though - you are correct - at least from that perspective I can understand your viewpoint better and respect it. It is less hypocritical IMO.

On the other hand I would hazard a guess that there are things that you do you should also be ashamed of (I mean...who doesn't?). How you live with yourself though is none of my business so I wouldn't dream of making public statements about you criticizing how you live your life or whatever.

My wife is Japanese so actually I find you telling us that she should be ashamed insulting and offensive. She ate whale as a small child. Nowadays it's not really available and incredibly expensive even if it is. A thousand whales or so per year doesn't go a long way in a country of 88 million. She's not ashamed of it though and has no reason to be - as she has no reason to listen to people from the other side of the world telling her how she should live her life.

If you think that's a rationalization we are obviously not speaking the same language here.

 

[gangrel441]

Hum...allow me to illustrate one example of how you are twisting the facts to suit your needs...

Hmm...killing them isn't hurting them? I remain unconvinced. They're doing more harm to the Minke and Fin whale population than any other nation on Earth in fact.

Clearly, what was being discussed was whether or not the Minke as a species was being hurt, yet this response clearly is referring to hurting individuals of the species. Apples and oranges, yet you use it to support your argument. Whatever it takes, I guess...

 

[Captain CaveMan]

If its getting used for food. good let them eat it if they want to. It like people that drive Hummers and big truck--aka me--- I how i live my life and its my choice. yes it hurts the enviroment. but who many of us drive the big gas suckers. more than you can count. when they could realy only need a civic. its your choice. i see the same with the japanese yes they dont have to eat them but if they do than thats there choice and i respect that.