So Japan has won its first vote at the IWC in around 20 years. The vote itself was purely symbolic with no legal standing, but may indicate that they may find the numbers to overturn the ban on commercial whaling within the next few years.
I was thinking about this morning on the way to work when they were talking about it on the radio. I have always been opposed to commercial whaling, but this morning I was struggling to think of many good reasons against it. Upon getting into work, I found that David Farrar has had similar thoughts, and found it difficult to find a non-emotional argument against whaling.
The problem is, we don't complain about normal commercial fishing, so what is the problem then, with commercial whaling? I have no problem with commercial fishing of other fish, and hunting of animals, so what's the difference with whales?
There are a few of things that I can think of:
- There are still serious concerns about the whale numbers, and the danger of commercial whaling bringing them to extinction.
- The act of kiling that whales appears to be very cruel - it is not as simple as normal hunting, or slaughtering cattle, and one can hardly argue that it is painless for the whale.
- There are serious concerns about the real demand for whale meat in Japan anyway, giving the amount they currently throw out under their "scientific whaling" studies.
- Japan is blatantly bribing countries to overturn the ban on commercial whaling.
Well, (4) is not really an argument against whaling itself, just against how the Japs are going about legalising it. The problem then, is that potentially (1), (2), and (3) can all be overcome. The question I have to ask myself is if it could be shown conclusively that there were significant whale populations, a method of mercifully killing them could be found, and there was a real demand for it, would I still oppose commercial whaling?
On balance, I still think I would be. But I'm struggling to put my finger on why.
Maybe it just is because they're cute.
Comments
I think there are some serious questions to be asked about the viability of fisheries in their current form. Fish catches have been steadily declining for the last few decades. There is a very real danger of exhausting many common fish stocks within our lifetime.
*shrug* I don't even like fish, but I guess there are some other long term problems than my culinary choices.
I think it comes down to your world view if you are looking at the pure ethics of it.
Are whales and humans as inherently valuable as each other?
if you think we and animals are on the same playing field then the that can can lead you down a path of logic where its inherently wrong to kill them. (eg extreme political veagans)
If you think People are on a differrent level to other animals and our role is stewardship then you can have a hypothetical situation where it's morally ok to kill a whale given the right conditions.
So is it wrong to kill a whale just because it's a whale? an interesting question to ask if you want to see how people view the wolrd.