Guest guest Posted June 29, 2000 Report Share Posted June 29, 2000 ===== A message from the 'makahwhaling' discussion list ===== FROM WASHINGTON CITIZEN'S COASTAL ALLIANCE -------------------- SEKIU, WA: 7:42pm PDT Weather: Rough, windy, cold, foggy, sunny, calm, warm and freezing cold: all within the last eight hours! Things are heating up for the IWC meeting in Adelaide, Australia! Our first item details the Congressional letter spearheaded by Rep. Jack Metcalf (R-WA) which was just sent to the IWC today. We have also included a few short items on the drama even now unfolding on the international stage... Please visit www.stopwhalekill.org for background information on the IWC meeting, as well as a number of things that YOU can do to make your voice heard. You will also find contact information for Rep. Metcalf. Take a moment to thank him for his ongoing efforts on behalf of the gray whales! ***** METCALF CALLS ON IWC TO HALT MAKAH WHALE HUNT --------------------- June 28, 2000 Congressional Leaders Join Metcalf in Call for Ban Washington, DC -- Led by Rep. Jack Metcalf (R-WA), thirty-one members of Congress sent a letter to the International Whaling Commission calling on them to stop the Makah Indian Tribe's gray whale hunt on the Washington state coast. Joining Metcalf on the letter were Rep. George Miller (D-CA) Ranking Member on the House Resources Committee, Rep. Benjamin Gilman (R-NY) Chairman of the House International Relations Committee and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Ranking Member on the House Appropriations Foreign Operations Subcommittee. Metcalf stated: " In 1997, the IWC was duped by the Clinton/Gore Administration when it approved the 1997 joint quota request which allowed the Makah to begin hunting whales. Members of the IWC were led to believe that the U.S. government had fully complied with U.S. law. However, this month the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed what I have been saying all along: the Clinton/Gore Administration has violated our country's environmental laws in order to justify allowing the slaugphter of these whales that were already once hunted to near extinction. I am proud that thirty of my colleagues have joined me in writing the IWC to expose this subterfuge. " On June 9, 2000, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a branch of the U.S. Commerce Department, violated the most basic requirements of U.S. environmental law in the course of supporting the Makah Indian Tribe's unprecedented attempt to hunt gray whales in a National Marine Sanctuary. The Court ruled that the Department of Commerce had subverted the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by making a decision to support the Makah's whaling effort -- including committing to advocate the Makah's position to the IWC -- before engaging in any of the required NEPA analysis. The Fifty-Second Annual Meeting of the International Whaling Commission is being held in Adelaide, Australia, July 3-6, 2000. However, the main convocation is preceded by meetings of the critical Whale Killing Methods & Associated Welfare Issues Working Group and the Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Committee which have meetings on Friday, June 30. TEXT OF CONGRESSIONAL LETTER SENT TO THE IWC -------------- June 28, 2000 IWC Commissioners: We, the undersigned members of the 106th Congress of the United States, are writing to urge the IWC to stop the Makah Indian Tribe's gray whale hunt. On June 9, 2000, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a branch of the U.S. Commerce Department, violated the most basic requirements of U.S. environmental law in the course of supporting the Makah Indian Tribe's unprecedented attempt to hunt gray whales in a National Marine Sanctuary. The Court ruled that the Department of Commerce had subverted the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by making a decision to support the Makah's whaling effort -- including committing to advocate the Makah's position to the IWC -- before engaging in any of the required NEPA analysis. The U.S. government never conducted an unbiased lawful analysis of the effects of the proposed hunt -- including its potential repercussions on the small resident whale population that resides within the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary. Impairment of the public's ability to enjoy that Sanctuary was not considered. The government's ability to continue to execute the will of Congress in effectively opposing the resumption of commercial whaling worldwide, in light of the Makah hunt, was not evaluated. Consequently, the Court ordered the government to complete a new environmental assessment " free of the previous taint " before supporting the hunt. When the IWC approved the 1997 joint quota request which allowed the Makah to begin hunting whales, members of the IWC were led to believe that the U.S. government had adequately studied the matter, and had complied fully with U.S. law. Presumably, if the members of the IWC knew that the U.S. government had run roughshod over its most elementary legal requirements, they would never have approved such a quota. Under these circumstances, It is obvious that the IWC should immediately recognize that its prior consideration of this matter was tainted by the U.S. government's violation of environmental law. Once the Department of Commerce has fulfilled its environmental obligations, the Commission should have the opportunity to debate the merits of the Makah whaling application with full knowledge of its effects. Thank you for your attention to this letter. We are confident that when the IWC is able to evaluate an unbiased assessment of the full effects of the Makah hunt, it will call for an end to it. Sincerely, FIRST PAGE Jack Metcalf (R-WA) George Miller (D-CA) Benjamin Gilman (R-NY) SECOND PAGE Doc Hastings (R-WA) Brian Bilbray (R-CA) Sam Farr (D-CA) Bruce Vento (D-MN) Christopher Shays (R-CT) Merrill Cook (R-UT) John Olver (D-MA) Jennifer Dunn (R-WA) James Clyburn (D-SC) Robert Wexler (D-FL) Peter Deutsch (D-FL) Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Nita Lowey (D-NY) Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD) Duncan Hunter (R-CA) Connie Morella (R-MD) Gary Ackerman (D-NY) Ed Whitfield (R-KT) Joe Scarborough (R-FL) THIRD PAGE Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) William Delahunt (D-MA) Peter DeFazio (D-OR) Tom Lantos (D-CA) Ellen Tauscher (D-CA) Phil English (R-PA) ***** NEW ZEALAND PRESS SOURCES ---- 26-Jun-00 03:45 pm Regular Parliament COMMISSION'S ROLE IN PRO-WHALING MEETING `CONCERNING' SAYS LEE Wellington, June 26, NZPA - Conservation Minister Sandra Lee today expressed concern over the Waitangi Fisheries Commission's role in hosting a pro-whaling conference later this year. ``It rather amuses me that some people from the Maori fisheries commission, who in my view have been instrumental in extinguishing some customary rights in this country, have suddenly metamorphised into champions of it when it comes to hunting whales,'' she said. ``I don't support that view and I am Maori too.'' Ms Lee made the comments after accepting a Greenpeace petition signed by more than 104,000 people backing a global whale sanctuary. The commission and several South Island iwi plan to host the World Council of Whalers' third assembly in Nelson in November. Waitangi Fisheries commissioner Archie Taiaroa has said Maori were opposed to International Whaling Commission (IWC) rules limiting indigenous whale harvesting to subsistence levels. Subsistence meant no trade and no possibility of investing in humane methods of killing them. New Zealand has supported a moratorium on hunting whales since 1986. Ms Lee told NZPA today she was ``very concerned'' the Waitangi Fisheries Commission was helping host the pro-whaling conference. The commission was a Crown-appointed body ``and I would have thought at the very least they would have to go through some sort of formal mandating process before they took it on themselves to speak for all Maori on this issue''. She hoped that was what it would do even though invitations had already gone out for the pro-whaling conference. ----- 26-Jun-00 03:43 pm Regular Parliament NZ, AUST `CLOSE TO GETTING NUMBERS NEEDED FOR WHALING SANCTUARY' Wellington, June 26, NZPA - New Zealand and Australia were very close to getting the support they needed for a South Pacific whale sanctuary, Conservation Minister Sandra Lee said today. New Zealand and Australia have proposed establishing a South Pacific whale sanctuary that will complement those existing in the Southern Ocean and the Indian Ocean. Ms Lee is leading the New Zealand delegation to the International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting in Adelaide, Australia, next week when member countries will debate the proposal. About 300 delegates and observers from 35 countries will be at the meeting from July 3 to July 6. Debate on the sanctuary is likely on July 4. New Zealand and Australia need the support of 75 percent of voting countries to establish the sanctuary and Ms Lee told reporters today they were ``very'' close to getting the numbers. The number of countries objecting to the proposal could be counted ``on one hand''. She did not wish to name those countries today, saying she was advised yesterday that those countries were ``changing as we speak''. ``I'm optimistic though that those representing the New Zealand Government who are there lobbying already will be doing a very good job to persuade those who may have concerns that this is the right way to go.'' One issue being raised was customary rights for indigenous people. Ms Lee said the advice she had received was that access arrangements to dead whales for bone and other material would not be affected by the sanctuary. ``... but the bottom line surely has to be also that whales have a customary right to continue to survive, to continue to use their traditional migratory paths through the South Pacific ocean and to continue to remain on the planet so that future generations of New Zealanders and others can behold them.'' The United Kingdom, the United States, Austria, Monaco and Italy were among those countries indicating their support for a South Pacific sanctuary. Opposition is expected from Japan and Norway. Ms Lee was today presented with a Greenpeace petition, that was launched in January and has been signed by 104,223 people, calling for a global whale sanctuary. Greenpeace ocean ecology campaigner Sarah Duthie said New Zealanders had shown their overwhelming support for permanent protection of whales by signing the petition. Green Party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons said it gave the Government a mandate to push hard for the South Pacific sanctuary. Ms Lee said the sanctuary was needed to: * Protect whale stocks that had been severely depleted by whaling in the 19th and 20th centuries and allow for their recovery; * Complement and improve the effectiveness of the Southern Ocean Sanctuary in protecting migratory species; * Foster and allow for long-term, ecosystem-based research on whale stocks that were not being harvested; and * Manage whale stocks in accordance with the goal of long-term conservation of biodiversity. -- 26-Jun-00 05:37 pm Regular International NORTH ATLANTIC WHALING COUNTRIES WARN OF TORRID MEETING By Robert Lowe of NZPA Sydney, June 26 - A North Atlantic lobby today criticised New Zealand and Australia's ``hypocritical'' stance on whaling and predicted that plans for a South Pacific whale sanctuary would not go ahead this year. The High North Alliance -- representing whalers in Norway, Iceland, Greenland, the Faroes and Canada -- also forecast that next week's International Whaling Commission meeting in Adelaide would be a torrid one. ``I think it will be a very hostile meeting,'' Alliance secretary Rune Frovik said in Sydney. ``I don't think there will be any constructive progress.'' New Zealand and Australia are to push ahead with a joint proposal for a South Pacific sanctuary during the four-day meeting. A 75 percent vote is needed among the commission's 40 members for the plan to proceed. Whale sanctuaries already exist in the Indian and Southern oceans and the ultimate goal of environmentalists is a global sanctuary. Japan and Norway will led the opposition to a South Pacific sanctuary, with Caribbean nations expected to be among those also to vote against. Although the proposal would not affect North Atlantic countries, the final objective of the New Zealand and Australian governments would, Mr Frovik said. ``The sooner a South Pacific sanctuary is established, the sooner a global sanctuary is established as well, and then we've lost,'' he said. ``But I don't think New Zealand and Australia will have the numbers, unless they have done a tremendous amount of work since last year.'' Mr Frovik, a Norwegian, said the proposal was unnecessary because of an IWC scheme that would be implemented if the international moratorium on commercial whaling was lifted. The Revised Management Scheme (RMS), which would include catch quotas and on-board observers, would ensure adequate protection. ``Those whales that need protecting are being protected,'' he said. An international moratorium was implemented in 1986 and remains in force. However, Norway objected to it and resumed commercial hunting of minke whales in 1993, while Japan engages in whaling for it calls scientific purposes. Norwegian whalers argue that their industry, unlike commercial whaling in other parts of the world during the 20th century which severely depleted stocks, is based on sustainability. The Norwegian minke whale quota this year was set at 655 whales from a north-east Atlantic stock estimated by the IWC in 1996 at 112,000. They say many Norwegian coastal communities would lose their livelihoods without whaling. They also argue that whale meat is more environmentally friendly to produce than beef or lamb, which requires a natural habitat to be turned into agricultural land. Mr Frovik believed the stance of both New Zealand and Australia towards whaling was based on ``a lot of hypocrisy and double standards''. He said it was easy for politicians to take a position on environmental issues that did not affect their own country and he believed there was also an economic reason for the trans-Tasman opposition. ``They want to export their beef to a country like Japan, while we would like to export whale meat there,'' he said. ``Of course, that would mean two types of meat competing in the same market. As long as New Zealand and Australian beef doesn't have to compete with whale meat from the North Atlantic, that's fine for them.'' ***** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.