THE RESUMPTION OF WHALING BY NORWAY
Introduction The following paper is about the resumption of whaling by Norway with a focus on the American attitude towards whaling in general. Whaling is a very sensitive issue for many people, including myself. There are many people who feel that whales are highly intelligent mammals, akin to humanity in many ways. They cite the fact that whales mate for life, the size of the average whales brain, and the proof that whales communicate with one another ; all of these traits they share with us. The anti-whaling people feel that to kill whales for their meat or oil, would be like killing people for their meat or oil. The pro whaling people don't buy any of their reasoning. The pro whaling people feel that it is their right to use their resources any way that they want, and no one can tell them what to do. These people don't feel that whales are intelligent or that the size of their brains has any thing to do with it. The people of Norway don't see a problem with whaling because they were raised w ith it. The anti-whali An international study by Milton Freeman and Stephen Kellert, published in 1992, surveyed people in 6 major countries including Australia, Germany, Japan, Norway, The United Kingdom and The United States about
their attitudes towards whales and whaling. 57% of the US respondents confirmed that they "opposed the hunting of whales under any circumstances" and 55% felt that "even regulated whaling must be abandoned" (Skare 1994). Although none of the respondent groups showed a high level of knowledge on the subject, all seemed to agree on the following points. 1. The protection of whale habitats from pollution and disturbance. 2. Maintaining an "ecosystem" perspective in whale management. 3. Basing harvest levels on the most sound scientific advice available. In Norway where whale hunting was once a big industry the proponents of whaling scoff at the prospect of a world without whaling. Norway claims that whaling in their country dates back more than ten thousand years (Skare 1994) and that history, they claim, gives them the right to exploit the resources that they have available to them; what they don't say is that those "resources" aren't really their own to exploit. Eric Doyle, a member of Greenpeace, an environmental watchdog group, explained to me (over the telephone) that the boundaries that countries draw up don't mean anything to whales or even to whaling boats in some instances. Doyle, explained that because Norway is one of the very few countries that have resumed whaling ,their boats aren't closely watched, and are often overlooked because there aren't many of them out there (Doyle 1995). Norwegians who are involved in whaling, hunt Minke whales in the northeast Atlantic, where the whale stock is estimated to consist of approximately eighty-six thousand seven hundred minke whales (Donovan 1994). In the late eighties Norway imposed a ban on itself that ended whaling, commercially, whaling for the purpose of scientific research, however continued with no end in sight. The History of The Regulated Whaling Industry... Whaling has always been a source of income and, whales an endless source of useful products. The
Some common words found in the essay are:
League Nations, , Kingdom United, Doyle Greenpeace, IWC Greenpeace, Industry Whaling, Commission IWC, ICRW IWC, ICRW Norway, Whaling Commission, league nations, whaling industry, people feel, skare 1994, minke whales, international whaling commission, people don't, regulated whaling, whales whaling, abstaining voting, pro whaling, growing whaling industry, pro whaling people,
Approximate Word count = 1298
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
