A bid to take whale conservation to the UN General Assembly failed at the International Whaling Commission (IWC) after criticism from hunting nations.
Monaco's proposal noted that many species were not covered by IWC rules.
The resolution also cited "significant unregulated catches" - a reference to Japan's scientific whaling programmes.
Meanwhile, the Danish and Greenlandic governments will "reflect" on whaling options for Greenlandic Inuit after the IWC denied a bid to raise quotas.
Options include setting quotas unilaterally without the IWC's explicit approval, or even withdrawing from the body. Either would be intensely controversial.
Nothing has caused more controversy here, though, than South Korea's announcement that it was preparing to allow some of its fishermen to hunt whales under regulations permitting a catch for scientific research.
Japan has had such programmes in place since 1986, including the annual hunt in the Southern Ocean, which has been declared a whale sanctuary.
While that is not a breach of IWC rules, the anti-whaling bloc believe it is fundamentally wrong - which was one reason behind Monaco's resolution.
Another was the long-standing debate over the IWC's remit. Whaling countries argue it should only cover species that have been hunted, while others want it to work for the conservation of all cetaceans.
The resolution invited governments to "consider these issues in collaboration with the UN General Assembly, with a view to contributing to the conservation efforts of the IWC".
There was general acceptance that such a resolution should only go forward by consensus; and it was soon clear that consensus was absent.
Japan's deputy commissioner Akima Umezawa went as far as to declare the proposal "ridiculous".
And Norway's Einar Tallaksen said issues regarding cetaceans "are not a matter for the UN General Assembly but for the competent fisheries organisations including the IWC".
As far as this meeting is concerned, the proposal is abandoned, though Monaco will work for it within the UN and is launching a "task force" of supportive nations.
Unilateral moves? Continue reading the main storyGuide to the great whales
On the final day of the IWC's annual meeting, held this time in Panama City, delegations were also mulling the implications of Denmark's decision to leave without a whale-hunting quota for the Greenland Inuit.
Denmark represents Greenland in the organisation.
It came asking for increased quotas for humpback and fin whales, in addition to maintaining existing levels for minkes and bowheads.
The bid became more controversial after environment groups reported finding whale meat on sale in many supermarkets and restaurants; and with the EU against the expansion, the bid fell.
"We are going to go home and reflect, because this is a situation that needs to be handled with care," said Danish delegation head Ole Samsing.
Experienced observers noted that in previous years, Denmark has been willing to compromise its requests in order to get something agreed.
The EU would have supported a continuation of the existing quotas, but the Danes opted instead to leave with nothing.
"There can be no doubt that Denmark knew when it put the proposal to a vote that it would fail," said Sue Fisher, on behalf of the Washington DC-based Animal Welfare Institute.
"It could have walked out of here days ago with a perfectly adequate quota to meet the subsistence needs of indigenous communities in Greenland for the next six years, but it was prepared to lose everything for a handful of extra whales that, our recent surveys show, could well end up on the menu in tourist restaurants."
The issue is made more complex by the evolving relationship between Greenland, a hunting-based society of just over 50,000 people, and its former colonial ruler.
Several years ago, Greenland formally asked the Danish government to put its whaling outside the IWC's aegis; but it is understood that it would now prefer to remain within the organisation.
It is inconceivable that hunting will stop, so the question is how Greenland intends to go forward.
Its own interpretation of rules on aboriginal subsistence whaling (ASW) is that countries are entitled to set their own quotas provided they are consistent with IWC scientific advice. Other countries disagree.
The US is also opening the door to unilateral action, with draft legislation introduced into Congress that would allow the government to set quotas if the IWC denied them.
Follow Richard on Twitter
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18735621#sa-ns_mchannel=rss&ns_source=PublicRSS20-sa
beyonce dance for you beyonce dance for you nba lockout over nba lockout news nba lockout news gifts for mom gifts for mom
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.