Plants and Animals

The Humane Society International brought an action against Japanese whalers in Australia’s Federal Court for breaking the law by killing whales in Australia’s southern whale sanctuary.

On January 15, Justice James Allsop ruled that the Japanese whaling fleet controlled by Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd has broken Australian law in particular by contravening the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999, and issued an injunction against continued whaling. **

Australia has jurisdiction in the exclusive economic zone attached to the Antarctic territories, but the Judge noted that Japan does not recognise Australia’s Antarctic claim.

In fact most countries do not recognise the Australian Antarctic claim so there is no practical way for the order to be enforced.

A spokesman for the Fisheries Agency of Japan, Mr Hideki Moronuki, told the ABC he is not in a position to comment on the ruling because Australia’s claim to Antarctic waters is not recognised by the international community. He says the case is a domestic matter for Australia.

Graham Young has suggested that,

“If there is no way that the order can be enforced, why waste money seeking it in the first place? Australia will not take action against the Japanese under this order because that would be an act of war, not under Australian law, but according to the law of most other countries in the world. It has a lot of things in common with the Iraq war in that respect. But in refusing to take action against the Japanese it will weaken our ability to take action against anyone else in those waters for any other environmental abuses.”

The blog post, dated January 15 is aptly entitled ‘Whaling Illusion Stripped Bare’.

————–
** Humane Society International Inc v Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd [2008] FCA 3

1. THE COURT DECLARES that the respondent has killed, injured, taken and interfered with Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) and fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) and injured, taken and interfered with humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229, 229A, 229B and 229C of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth), (the “Act”), and has treated and possessed such whales killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229D and 230 of the Act, without permission or authorisation under sections 231, 232 or 238 of the Act.

2. THE COURT ORDERS that the respondent be restrained from killing, injuring, taking or interfering with any Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis), fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) or humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, or treating or possessing any such whale killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, unless permitted or authorised under sections 231, 232 or 238 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth).

Read more here http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/federal_ct/2008/3.html

An illegal whale meat operation was recently exposed in South Korea seizing over 50 tonnes of minke whale meat. Accidentally caught cetaceans can be legally sold in South Korean restaurants (located in Ulsan, Busan and Pohang) as long as this death is reported to the Maritime Police.

South Korea is a migratory corridor for a number of cetacean species, including the highly endangered Western Gray Whale. Only about 121 individuals survive, with entanglement and other anthropogenic threats undermining their comeback from over-exploitation during commercial whaling days. Local populations of species also exist around the Peninsula, such as the tiny finless porpoise.

The marine mammal by-catch problem has been labelled “marine bushmeat” (1), and presents many of the same issues as terrestrial bushmeat, including loss of biodiversity and threatening endangered populations. In a recent paper (2), researchers used techniques to identify the species and origins of cetacean meat sold in South Korean markets. A total of 289 minke whale samples were obtained during 12 surveys of South Korean markets from 1999-2003. Mitochondrial haplotype, sex and microsatellite-based genotyping was used, revealing products originated from 205 individuals. A capture-recapture technique then estimated that 827 minkes passed through the markets during this 5-year period. This number is somewhat larger than the 458 South Korea reported to the IWC for the same period. This technique also provided an estimate of the “half-life” of market products on sale during the survey (about 1.8 months), illustrating that markets should be monitored regularly for accurate results to be obtained.

When the figure of 827 South Korean J-Stock minkes is added to the reported Japanese incidental take of 390 from the Sea of Japan during 1999-2003 (assuming no under-reporting), over 1,200 whales were taken from this protected stock during this period (3). Some models suggest the minke J-stock cannot sustain this rate of loss. In fact previous research has suggested that in order to avoid further depletion, an annual loss of less than 50 J-stock minkes is required, and for the stock to recover, “incidental or illegal directed takes must be reduced to levels approaching zero” (4). The results of this 2000 model were originally rejected by Japan and South Korea as being “implausibly high”, but it now appears the model relied on under-reporting of South Korean by-catch and must be rejected as “implausibly low”.

Minke whales are frequently cited as being anything other than endangered, but genetically distinct populations of minkes are recognised. The J-stock is found in Korea’s East Sea. Due to declining catch per unit effort, in 1983 the IWC Scientific Committee concluded that the J-stock was depleted and should be classified as a protected stock. In the light of past commercial hunting, ongoing by-catch and low abundance estimates from recent surveys, the Committee has repeatedly expressed concern for the further depletion or even extinction of this stock. This stock may also make up some of the 100 minkes killed annually in Japan’s JARPN II hunt.

In 2005, a ‘whale treatment facility’ planned by the Ulsan Metropolitan City, was to provide a “check point for dealing with whale carcasses in an environmentally-friendly and sanitary manner” (Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, 2005). South Korea’s policies are “designed to promote the rational and scientific conservation and sustainable use of whales and dolphins” (MOMAF, 2005), but with a mooted whale meat processing factory, no mitigation measures to reduce by-catch levels and an adult minke fetching an estimated US $100, 000, the incentive is to increase rather than reduce cetacean by-catch in these waters. The legal sale of such incidental catch may also provide the cover for directed illegal hunting and even intentional net whaling.

Japan views market monitoring as outside the IWC’s jurisdiction, but inspection procedures and sustainable stocks are required under the Revised Management Scheme before commercial whaling is to resume. Clapham and Van Waerebeek (2007) write “Market monitoring may be the only way to assess the full toll of by-catch, poaching and legal whaling.” Japan and Norway have DNA registries for material from legally killed whales, but have “resisted independent international oversight of these databases.”

Molecular analysis can provide tools for assessing the extent of illegal trade in animals, but it can also highlight genetically-isolated and unique populations. As Palumbi (2007) writes: “The larger oceanic population might be able to sustain a catch of 200 animals a year, but the structure of the whale population is sometimes so local that small and isolated populations such as the J-stock cannot support a loss rate that may seem minor on the whole-ocean scale”.

________________________________________________________________________
Many thanks to Jennifer and Ann for providing the links.

(1) Clapham, P and Van Waerebeek, K. (2007) Bushmeat and Bycatch: the sum of parts. Molecular Ecology, 16, 2607-2609.

(2) Baker, C. S. et al. (2007) Estimating the number of whales entering trade using DNA profiling and capture-recapture analysis of market products. Molecular Ecology, 16, 2617-2626.

(3) Palumbi, S. (2007) In the market for minke whales. Nature. Vol 447, 267-268.

(4) Baker, C. S. et al (2000) Predicted decline of protected whales based on molecular genetic monitoring of Japanese and Korean markets. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, 267, 1191-1199.

Two crew of the Sea Shepherd who illegally boarded the Japanese whaling ship Yushin Maru No. 2 in the Antarctic have been captured. According to the Director General of the Institute of Cetacean Research, Mr Minoru Morimoto, Ben Potts and Giles Lane (both of the Sea Shepherd) attempted to entangle the screw of the vessel using ropes and threw bottles of acid onto the decks before boarding.

Ben Potts

Giles Lane

“Any accusations that we have tied them up or assaulted them are completely untrue,” Mr Morimoto said. “It is illegal to board another country’s vessels on the high seas. As a result, at this stage, they are being held in custody while decisions are made on their future.”

Acid Bottle Smashed on Deck

Acid Bottle Thrown by Pirates

“Within the European Union, six species have been classified as Critically Endangered by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The most threatened category includes the Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) and the European mink, which both have very small and declining populations. Only 150 Iberian Lynx survive today and the Mediterranean monk seal population has decreased to between 350-450 individuals.”

Photograph of an Arctic Fox courtesy of Denis-Carl Robidaux via Ann Novek

“The Arctic fox has evolved to live in the most frigid extremes on the planet. Among its adaptations for cold survival are its deep, thick fur, a system of countercurrent heat exchange in the circulation of paws to retain core temperature, and a good supply of body fat. The fox has a low surface-area-to-volume ratio as evidenced by its generally rounded body shape, short muzzle and legs, and short, thick ears. Since less of its surface area is exposed to the cold, less heat escapes the body. Its furry paws allow it to walk on ice floors in search of food. It is also able to walk on top of snow and listen for the movements of prey underneath. Their thick fur is the warmest of any mammal.”

In Scandinavia there are only about 120 arctic foxes left. There is a project in Sweden, to help save the foxes, including additional feeding and hunting red foxes that are a threat to Arctic foxes (the red foxes are out competing the arctic foxes). The Arctic fox eat lemmings, Arctic hares and in some areas left-overs from polar bears.

Cheers,
Ann Novek
Sweden

Take a long look into the face of the world’s largest two-dimensional wheel-web weaving spider: The Golden Orb-weaver (Nephila pilipes).

The red appendages, projecting forward from the head region, are sensory organs called palps. They detect scent, sound and vibration. Between them are the powerful chelicerae; made up of the base segment and the fangs. Above, the cephalothorax houses six eyes with a three-dimensional outlook.

Gigantism in these animals correlates with increased temperature, so I suppose it is inevitable that we should all enjoy a closer familiarity in this anthropogenically-exacerbated interglacial warming period.

Dear Jennifer,

I hope that all of you had a safe and happy holiday season. In addition to wishing you the very best for 2008, I want to update you on the situation in Kenya that has been widely reported by the international press over the past two weeks.

The closely contested national election on December 27, combined with some irregularities in voter tallying has created conflict and exacerbated tensions in this historically politically stable African nation. All of us at the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF) are keeping all Kenyans and our Africa-based staff in our immediate thoughts during these tense times. We are gratified to report that all of Kenya-based staff are safe and affirm that everyone at AWF remains strongly committed to working with the Kenyan government and local communities to preserve and protect Africa’s natural heritage.

Last week’s disturbances were largely confined to low-income areas of Nairobi, as well as the Rift Valley and western Kenya, two political opposition strongholds. I am happy to report that since Monday, January 7, most areas of Nairobi have reopened for business. Reports from the field indicate that national parks and other protected wildlife areas were never a focus of disturbance during last week’s violence, and encouragingly, most tourist activities proceeded in a near ‘business as usual’ manner. Thankfully, the demonstrations planned for this week have been canceled, and the two leaders of the major political parties and Kenyans in general are working towards a solution so that the violence does not recur.

There is no doubt that Kenya’s international reputation for stability and peace has suffered. A recent article in the Washington Post discusses the impact of the situation on Kenya’s tourism-based economy, a main source of revenue. AWF is committed to working closely with our Kenyan partners engaged in conservation and the wildlife tourism community-and as per our mission, we will strive to find the right economic balance to promote development that complements conservation efforts and improves people’s livelihoods.

Be assured, we are watching the situation very closely and will keep you posted if there are major developments that affect AWF’s operations.

Kind Regards,
Helen W. Gichohi, Ph.D.
President AWF
Nairobi, Kenya