Who, What, Why: Is whale watching harmful to whales?

[Slack lines]

Concerns over whale watching are being discussed by the International Whaling Commission this week. So is it harmful to whales?

 

At least 13 million people go whale watching every year and it is an industry estimated to be worth £1.32bn ($2.1bn), according to the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW). In short, it is very big business.

 

Organised whale watching - typically going out in boats to see them swim - started in the US in the 1950s and is now done in 120 countries worldwide. The industry is still growing, with countries in Asia and Latin America getting more involved.

 

But the size of the industry has increased concern about its impact on whales. A series of measures to control badly managed whale watching is being discussed by the International Whaling Commission (IWC) at a meeting in Jersey. So does it harm the mammals?

 

Whale watching can have an impact on their natural behaviour, including their ability to feed, rest and rear their young. This can cause problems in the short and long term, say those working in the field of marine biology. Boats can also collide with the whales, putting everyone at risk.

 

"In the short term a boat interacting with whales can disrupt their activities, like stopping them foraging for food or resting," says Dr David Lusseau, from the Institute of Biological and Environmental Science at the University of Aberdeen.

 

"This can be no big deal once or twice, but problems start if this is repeated again and again over time. Whale watching is a big industry - in some places boats can go out 10 times a day.

 

"In the long term this can have an impact of the whales' vital rates. Females can even stop producing enough milk for their calves, which can decrease the survival rate of their young. Ultimately the viability of a pod can be threatened."

 

The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS) says harm can be done because whale watching is an industry established, like any other, to make money.

 

Some countries have specific legislation about whale watching, stipulating how many boats can be out at one time and what speed they can travel at. But even if they do, it's often hard to monitor the boats as they can go miles out to sea. Some countries don't even have voluntary guidelines and it can be a free-for-all.

 

"There is no such thing as a typical trip, they vary enormously depending on location," says Vanessa Williams-Grey, who heads the Responsible Whale Watch Programme at the WDCS.

 

"Badly run trips can translate into all sorts of negative reactions from the whales. They can stop resting or increase their respiratory rate. If they are using more energy this will have an impact on their health."

 

Travel company Oceans Worldwide offers whale-watching tours in Scotland. While whales are protect under wildlife laws in the UK, there is no specific legislation about whale watching. The company says it follows WDCS guidelines to ensure the highest standards on trips.

 

"It makes absolute sense to because if you cause stress to the whales they will only end up moving out of the area," says a spokeswoman.

 

Whales, however, can also benefit from the industry, say those in the field.

 

"It has huge benefits for people and the animals themselves as it turns people on to the magic of whales and dolphins," says Ms Williams-Grey. "This hopefully translates into a greater understanding of their conservation needs and a determination to help protect them against the myriad threats they face in the marine environment.

 

"This is not just vessels, but noise pollution, chemical pollution and of course deliberate hunts such as the current whaling activities in Iceland, Norway and Japan - and to a lesser extent elsewhere."

 

A part of BBC News Magazine, Who, What, Why? aims to answer questions behind the headlines

 

A lucrative whale-watching industry can function as an argument for not hunting them in pro-whaling countries.

 

The industry can also benefit local communities, some of whom have seen their fishing industries collapse. It is a case of getting the balance right, says Dr Lusseau.

 

"The economic benefits for local communities can be really positive, but you need a balance. If there is over exploitation and the whales are harmed in the long term then the industry will eventually collapse just like fishing."

 

No one is calling for an all-out ban on whale watching, people just need to chose trips carefully, adds Dr Lusseau. Advice is widely available.

 

The WDCS, which produces its own guidelines, says people should ask tour operators whether any regulations or voluntary codes apply in their area. Also, it is usually a good sign if a trip includes an onboard naturalist to provide educational commentary about the whales and the marine environment.

 

It's also worth remembering whale watching can be done from dry land. This is safest option and what the WDCS recommends whenever possible.

bbc.co.uk

[Slack lines]

Do anti-whaling campaigns backfire in Japan?

 

SAINT HELIER, United Kingdom (AFP) – Campaigns to harass Japan's whaling fleet only harden domestic opinion against environmentalists, a Japanese observer says at global whaling talks in the British Channel Islands.

 

Most Japanese shun whale as food and many are sympathetic to the arguments of conservationists seeking to protect the huge sea mammals, but do not want to feel bullied, said Atsushi Ishii, a Tokyo University professor and author of "Anatomy of the Whaling Debate".

 

"The majority of Japanese are anti-antiwhaling," Ishii told AFP.

 

"They don't want whalemeat, but they don't want the anti-whaling organisations to tell them what to do."

 

Much of that ire is directed at the US-based Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, headed by Paul Watson.

 

In February, Japan recalled its Antarctic whaling fleet a month ahead of schedule with only one fifth of its planned catch, citing interference and harassment from ships operated by Sea Shepherd.

 

Watson has already said he plans to resume his campaign and predicted Japan will abandon hunting in Antarctica, one of two whale preserves in the world.

 

But even for Japanese opposed to large-scale whaling, Ishii said, "the anti-whaling movement has to stop. The movement is actually increasing support (in Japan) for scientific whaling."

 

Despite a moratorium that went into effect in 1986, Japan conducts whale hunting under the guise of "scientific research", setting self-determined quotas averaging about 1,000 whales each year over the last five years.

 

This practice is permissible within the rules of the IWC.

 

But other nations and environmental groups fiercely condemn it, seeing it as a cover for commercial operations.

 

Ishii agreed that the annual hunt was of scant scientific value, and said that the practice exists mainly to justify an annual subsidy of about five million dollars to the industry.

 

Even if Sea Shepherd succeeds in chasing Japanese whalers from Antarctica this year, it may not be the clear-cut victory that Watson describes.

 

"It depends on how you define victory," said Ishii, who is attending the 63rd meeting of the IWC, which got underway on Monday on the island of Jersey.

 

"Whalemeat has not been selling well in Japan for years. The reality is that the whaling industry doesn't want more meat," he said.

 

Frozen stocks of whalemeat stand at more than 6,000 tonnes, enough to keep the country in supply at current consumption rates for 18 months, he said.

 

"So the Sea Shepherd attacks actually work in favour of the (government's) Fisheries Agency and the whaling industry, providing a reason to pull back from the Antarctic without having fulfilled its official targets."

 

Ishii thinks that the Japanese government is, in fact, trying to find a way to curtail whaling operations in Antarctic waters, but politically does not want to be seen as caving in to foreign pressure.

 

"If we pull out of Antarctica, it would be perceived as a total loss against the anti-whaling organisations. Politicians are not eager to accept that," he said.

 

Watson said he doubted that his actions were boosting consumption of whale meat in Japan, but added that he was, in any case, indifferent to Japanese public opinion.

 

"I don't think that's true but I don't really care. My objective is to stop their illegal activities and we are succeeding in doing that," he told AFP.

 

"We are not going to convince the people of Japan to stop killing whales but we can force them by bankrupting them (the whalers). I'm not interested in educating the Japanese people."

 

Ishii said that the only long-term compromise possible at the deeply riven whaling body would be for Japan to accept the ban on Antarctic whaling in return for a lifting of the moratorium for limited hunting in national coastal waters.

old.news.yahoo.com