The Experts below are selected from a list of 41655 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Phillip J Clapham - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
what s the catch validity of Whaling data for japanese catches of sperm whales in the north pacific
Royal Society Open Science, 2015Co-Authors: Yulia V Ivashchenko, Phillip J ClaphamAbstract:The failure of international efforts to manage commercial Whaling was exemplified by revelations of large-scale illegal whale catches by the USSR over a 30 year period following World War II. Falsifications of catch data have also been reported for Japanese coastal Whaling, but to date there has been no investigation of the reliability of catch statistics for Japanese pelagic (factory fleet) Whaling operations. Here, we use data of known reliability from Soviet Whaling industry reports to show that body lengths reported to the International Whaling Commission (IWC) by Japanese factory fleets for female sperm whales caught in the North Pacific are not credible. In 1968/1969, Japanese Whaling fleets in the North Pacific killed 1568 females, of which 1525 (97.3%) were reported as being at or above the IWC's minimum length of 11.6 m (legal-sized females, LSFs). By contrast, Soviet fleets operating during this period killed 12 578 females; only 824 (6.6%) were LSFs. Adjusting for effort, catches of LSFs were up to 9.1 times higher for Japan compared with the USSR, and even higher for very large females. Dramatic differences in body length statistics were evident when both nations operated in the same area. Significantly, the frequency of LSFs and very large females in the Japanese catch markedly declined after the IWC's International Observer Scheme in 1972 made illegal Whaling more difficult. We conclude that the Japanese length data reflect systematic falsification of catch statistics submitted to the IWC, with serious implications for the reliability of data used in current population assessments. The apparent ease with which catch data were falsified in the past underscores the necessity of transparent and independent inspection procedures in any future commercial Whaling.
-
japan s Whaling following the international court of justice ruling brave new world or business as usual
Marine Policy, 2015Co-Authors: Phillip J ClaphamAbstract:Since 1987, Japan has conducted extensive special permit Whaling (“scientific Whaling”) in the Antarctic and North Pacific. This has been viewed by many as a way to circumvent the International Whaling Commission׳s (IWC) moratorium on commercial Whaling, which was implemented in 1985. Recently, Australia took Japan to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over this issue. Using various criteria, the Court ruled that Japan׳s Whaling was not “for purposes of scientific research” as required by Article VIII of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, and ordered Japan to immediately cease its JARPA II Whaling program in the Antarctic. Despite optimism that the Court׳s ruling might spell the end of Japanese Whaling in the Antarctic and even elsewhere, Japan has indicated that it will redesign its Whaling programs and continue operations. Based upon Japan׳s history at the IWC, I argue here that this was an expected outcome; I predict the course of events over the next months, and suggest that the ICJ ruling, while satisfying as an independent vindication of Japan׳s critics, represents little more than a temporary setback for that nation׳s Whaling enterprise.
-
too much is never enough the cautionary tale of soviet illegal Whaling
Marine Fisheries Review, 2014Co-Authors: Yulia V Ivashchenko, Phillip J ClaphamAbstract:Despite being a signatory to the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling in 1946, the U.S.S.R. conducted a 30-yr campaign of illegal Whaling which arguably represents one of the greatest failures of management in the history of the industry. Here, using a variety of sources including published literature, formerly secret Soviet industry reports, and interviews with former biologists and whalers, we provide an overview of the history, scope, and economic origins of Soviet Whaling and examine the domestic and international political context in which it was set. At various times from 1933 into the 1970’s, the U.S.S.R. operated a total of seven Whaling factory fl eets and several shore Whaling stations. We estimate that 534,119 whales were killed, of which 178,726 were not reported to the International Whaling Commission (IWC). In the Southern Hemisphere, the greatest impact of these catches was on humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, where (mostly illegal) takes of more than 48,000 whales precipitated a population crash and closure of shore Whaling stations in Australia and New Zealand. The Southern Hemisphere also saw large illegal catches of southern right whales, Eubalaena australis. In the North Pacifi c, the greatest impacts were on sperm whales, Physeter macrocephalus (where data on sex and length were routinely misreported together with falsifi ed total catches), as well as on the two already-small populations of right whales, Eubalaena japonica, across the North Pacifi c, and bowhead whales, Balaena mysticetus, in the Okhotsk Sea. Soviet Whaling was driven by the state industrial planning system, which frequently set high production targets without regard to the ability of the resource to sustain the Introduction In this article, we trace the history and details of what might be called one of the 20th century’s more notorious environmental crimes: the global campaign of illegal Whaling conducted by the U.S.S.R. between 1948 and 19721, a campaign that, together with the poorly managed “legal” Whaling of other nations, devastated many whale populations. It is a story of the sprawling Soviet planning system’s obsession with attaining production goals despite limited and diminishing resources, and of the U.S.S.R.’s desire to do every1In 1972 an International Observer Scheme was introduced and large-scale Soviet unrestricted catches ceased, but some falsifi cations of catch data continued on at least some Soviet fl eets for a few more years (Mikhalev et al., 2009). thing bigger and better than other nations, especially those in the capitalist world. More than anything, this is a cautionary tale of the failure of other Whaling nations and the International Whaling Commission (IWC) to react to mounting evidence of declining whale stocks, and to adequately monitor adherence to regulations and catch limits2 as set through international
-
The Whaling issue: Conservation, confusion, and casuistry
Marine Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Phillip J Clapham, Michael F. Tillman, Simon Childerhouse, Nicolas J. Gales, Lorenzo Rojas-bracho, Robert L. BrownellAbstract:Morishita's "multiple analysis" of the Whaling issue [Morishita J. Multiple analysis of the Whaling issue: Understanding the dispute by a matrix. Marine Policy 2006;30:802-8] is essentially a restatement of the Government of Japan's Whaling policy, which confuses the issue through selective use of data, unsubstantiated facts, and the vilification of opposing perspectives. Here, we deconstruct the major problems with Morishita's article and provide an alternative view of the Whaling dispute. For many people in this debate, the issue is not that some whales are not abundant, but that the Whaling industry cannot be trusted to regulate itself or to honestly assess the status of potentially exploitable populations. This suspicion has its origin in Japan's poor use of science, its often implausible stock assessments, its insistence that culling is an appropriate way to manage marine mammal populations, and its relatively recent falsification of Whaling and fisheries catch data combined with a refusal to accept true transparency in catch and market monitoring. Japanese policy on Whaling cannot be viewed in isolation, but is part of a larger framework involving a perceived right to secure unlimited access to global marine resources. Whaling is inextricably tied to the international fisheries agreements on which Japan is strongly dependent; thus, concessions made at the IWC would have potentially serious ramifications in other fora.
-
Japan's Whaling plan under scrutiny.
Nature, 2005Co-Authors: Nicholas J. Gales, Phillip J Clapham, Toshio Kasuya, Robert L. BrownellAbstract:Useful science or unregulated commercial Whaling? Nicholas J. Gales, Toshio Kasuya, Phillip J. Clapham and Robert L. Brownell Jr consider the scientific merits of Japan's Whaling activities. Japan has told the International Whaling Commission (IWC) of plans to double its annual catch of minke whales to over 900. Unlike commercial Whaling, scientific quotas are unregulated: since 1987 Japan has taken about 6,800 minke whales from Antarctic waters for research, and received millions of dollars from selling whale meat. In this issue, four members of IWC's Scientific Committee argue that ‘scientific’ Whaling is out of control. If the IWC is to deliver whale conservation or a sustainable Whaling industry, they say, its Scientific Committee needs a greatly expanded role.
Hal Whitehead - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
density dependent habitat selection and the modeling of sperm whale physeter macrocephalus exploitation
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 2000Co-Authors: Hal WhiteheadAbstract:The monitoring and management of sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) populations have proved problematic. Studies of living animals indicate that movements are largely determined by resource availability, thus suggesting that density-dependent habitat selection may be a realistic framework within which to study sperm whale populations. A model, in which animals migrate between 2 × 2° squares at rates that depend on relative resource availability, was used to examine the effects of Whaling on measures of sperm whale abundance. The model simulated four types of Whaling: shore-based Whaling, pelagic open-boat Whaling by many boats, pelagic Whaling by a fleet based around one factory ship, and pelagic Whaling by a fleet sequentially exploiting different parts of the study area. Catch per unit effort was found to have little relationship with population size in any part of the study area for shore-based Whaling and for pelagic Whaling when the study area was sequentially exploited. Thus, in these circumstance...
-
Density-dependent habitat selection and the modeling of sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) exploitation
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 2000Co-Authors: Hal WhiteheadAbstract:The monitoring and management of sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) populations have proved problematic. Studies of living animals indicate that movements are largely determined by resource availability, thus suggesting that density-dependent habitat selection may be a realistic framework within which to study sperm whale populations. A model, in which animals migrate between 2 × 2° squares at rates that depend on relative resource availability, was used to examine the effects of Whaling on measures of sperm whale abundance. The model simulated four types of Whaling: shore-based Whaling, pelagic open-boat Whaling by many boats, pelagic Whaling by a fleet based around one factory ship, and pelagic Whaling by a fleet sequentially exploiting different parts of the study area. Catch per unit effort was found to have little relationship with population size in any part of the study area for shore-based Whaling and for pelagic Whaling when the study area was sequentially exploited. Thus, in these circumstances, catch per unit effort should not be used as a measure of depletion. To give a reasonable assessment of depletion, visual or acoustic surveys must extend well beyond the areas being exploited.
Randall R Reeves - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the origins and character of aboriginal subsistence Whaling a global review
Mammal Review, 2002Co-Authors: Randall R ReevesAbstract:The International Whaling Commission (IWC) recognizes aboriginal subsistence Whaling to be distinct from commercial Whaling, and these two broad categories of Whaling are subject to different management approaches. This paper describes recent, ongoing and likely future whale hunts that qualify, or may qualify, for aboriginal subsistence status within the IWC’s management framework. To ensure conservation of the whale populations, a forthright exposition of the origins, development and character of these hunts is needed in addition to stock assessment, a risk-averse catch limit algorithm and appropriate mechanisms within the Whaling communities to ensure compliance. The hunts for Bowhead Whales (Balaena mysticetus) and Gray Whales (Eschrichtius robustus) in the Arctic and North Pacific, respectively, and Sperm Whales (Physeter macrocephalus) in Indonesia have long histories and local origins. Those for Humpback Whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Lesser Antilles and at Tonga in the South Pacific were introduced by foreign commercial whalers. Whale hunting in the Philippines appears to have originated both locally and as a result of foreign influence. The relatively recent initiation of Whaling for Fin Whales (Balaenoptera physalus) and Minke Whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in Greenland required introduced technology but can be viewed as a modern adaptation of an ancient tradition. Consensus in deciding how to classify and manage non-industrial Whaling has been, and will remain, elusive. Even with common definitions of key terms such as ‘subsistence’, ‘commercial’ and ‘aboriginal’, interpretations will depend on whether one’s priorities are whale-centred or human-centred.
Yulia V Ivashchenko - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
what s the catch validity of Whaling data for japanese catches of sperm whales in the north pacific
Royal Society Open Science, 2015Co-Authors: Yulia V Ivashchenko, Phillip J ClaphamAbstract:The failure of international efforts to manage commercial Whaling was exemplified by revelations of large-scale illegal whale catches by the USSR over a 30 year period following World War II. Falsifications of catch data have also been reported for Japanese coastal Whaling, but to date there has been no investigation of the reliability of catch statistics for Japanese pelagic (factory fleet) Whaling operations. Here, we use data of known reliability from Soviet Whaling industry reports to show that body lengths reported to the International Whaling Commission (IWC) by Japanese factory fleets for female sperm whales caught in the North Pacific are not credible. In 1968/1969, Japanese Whaling fleets in the North Pacific killed 1568 females, of which 1525 (97.3%) were reported as being at or above the IWC's minimum length of 11.6 m (legal-sized females, LSFs). By contrast, Soviet fleets operating during this period killed 12 578 females; only 824 (6.6%) were LSFs. Adjusting for effort, catches of LSFs were up to 9.1 times higher for Japan compared with the USSR, and even higher for very large females. Dramatic differences in body length statistics were evident when both nations operated in the same area. Significantly, the frequency of LSFs and very large females in the Japanese catch markedly declined after the IWC's International Observer Scheme in 1972 made illegal Whaling more difficult. We conclude that the Japanese length data reflect systematic falsification of catch statistics submitted to the IWC, with serious implications for the reliability of data used in current population assessments. The apparent ease with which catch data were falsified in the past underscores the necessity of transparent and independent inspection procedures in any future commercial Whaling.
-
too much is never enough the cautionary tale of soviet illegal Whaling
Marine Fisheries Review, 2014Co-Authors: Yulia V Ivashchenko, Phillip J ClaphamAbstract:Despite being a signatory to the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling in 1946, the U.S.S.R. conducted a 30-yr campaign of illegal Whaling which arguably represents one of the greatest failures of management in the history of the industry. Here, using a variety of sources including published literature, formerly secret Soviet industry reports, and interviews with former biologists and whalers, we provide an overview of the history, scope, and economic origins of Soviet Whaling and examine the domestic and international political context in which it was set. At various times from 1933 into the 1970’s, the U.S.S.R. operated a total of seven Whaling factory fl eets and several shore Whaling stations. We estimate that 534,119 whales were killed, of which 178,726 were not reported to the International Whaling Commission (IWC). In the Southern Hemisphere, the greatest impact of these catches was on humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, where (mostly illegal) takes of more than 48,000 whales precipitated a population crash and closure of shore Whaling stations in Australia and New Zealand. The Southern Hemisphere also saw large illegal catches of southern right whales, Eubalaena australis. In the North Pacifi c, the greatest impacts were on sperm whales, Physeter macrocephalus (where data on sex and length were routinely misreported together with falsifi ed total catches), as well as on the two already-small populations of right whales, Eubalaena japonica, across the North Pacifi c, and bowhead whales, Balaena mysticetus, in the Okhotsk Sea. Soviet Whaling was driven by the state industrial planning system, which frequently set high production targets without regard to the ability of the resource to sustain the Introduction In this article, we trace the history and details of what might be called one of the 20th century’s more notorious environmental crimes: the global campaign of illegal Whaling conducted by the U.S.S.R. between 1948 and 19721, a campaign that, together with the poorly managed “legal” Whaling of other nations, devastated many whale populations. It is a story of the sprawling Soviet planning system’s obsession with attaining production goals despite limited and diminishing resources, and of the U.S.S.R.’s desire to do every1In 1972 an International Observer Scheme was introduced and large-scale Soviet unrestricted catches ceased, but some falsifi cations of catch data continued on at least some Soviet fl eets for a few more years (Mikhalev et al., 2009). thing bigger and better than other nations, especially those in the capitalist world. More than anything, this is a cautionary tale of the failure of other Whaling nations and the International Whaling Commission (IWC) to react to mounting evidence of declining whale stocks, and to adequately monitor adherence to regulations and catch limits2 as set through international
Dale W Rice - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
have north pacific killer whales switched prey species in response to depletion of the great whale populations
Marine Ecology Progress Series, 2006Co-Authors: Sally A Mizroch, Dale W RiceAbstract:Springer et al. (2003; Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:12223-12228) hypothesized that pop- ulations of seals, sea lions and sea otters in the northern North Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea declined because of increased predation by killer whales, in what they termed a 'sequential megafaunal col- lapse'. They hypothesized that the killer whales had been dependent on large whales for food, and that their increased predation on the smaller marine mammals was directly due to the depletion of great whale populations as a result of post-World War II industrial Whaling. The maps presented by Springer et al. (2003) masked the development and precipitous decline of post-World War II indus- trial Whaling. Our analysis shows that north of 50° N, Whaling developed slowly from 1948 to 1951, expanded steadily from 1952 to 1962, and increased very sharply from 1963 to 1967. By 1968, there was near total drop-off in catches north of 50° N as the Whaling fleets moved south. Because of the extraordinary whale biomass removals in the mid-1960s, any Whaling-related prey shifting should have started by 1968, not the mid-1970s as they suggested. We also present data that refute their assumption that North Pacific killer whales depended on large whales as prey either prior to or con- current with the Whaling era. During the years of the development and pulse of Whaling (i.e. prior to 1968), less than 3% of the mammal-eating killer whales were observed to have large whale remains in their stomachs. Killer whales attack healthy, adult large whales only rarely, and such attacks are usually unsuccessful. Neither minke nor gray whales were depleted by post-World War II industrial Whaling, and they have always been available as prey for North Pacific killer whales.
