CETACEAN SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL

CONGRESSIONAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

22 May 2009
Prepared by CSI Director Emeritus
Dr. Robbins Barstow
Wethersfield, Connecticut, USA
Email: RobbinsB@aol.com

I. REPORT OF SMALL WORKING GROUP (SWG) ON THE FUTURE OF THE INTERNATIONAL WHALING COMMISSION (IWC) -- 18 May 2009

The concluding sentence of the extensive SWG report, after nearly two years and three major intersessisonal negotiating sessions, states: “It is against this background and to keep up the momentum that has been gained, that the SWG recommends to the IWC that, when it meets at Madeira [Portugal, June 22-26, 2009], it should direct that the efforts underway should be continued for a further year and decisions taken at IWC/62 [2010].”

II. PUBLIC OVERSIGHT HEARING IN ADVANCE OF THE 61ST ANNUAL MEETING OF THE INTERNATIONAL WHALING COMMISSION, HELD BY SUBCOMMITTEE ON INSULAR AFFAIRS, OCEANS, AND WILDLIFE OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES -- 20 May 2009

A strong opening statement (see below) was made by Subcommittee Chairwoman Madeleine Bordallo (Guam), followed by submitted testimonies from William T. Hogarth, U.S. Conmmissioner to the IWC, Kitty Block, Vice-President of Humane Society International, and C. Scott Baker, Marine Mammal Institute, Oregon State University.

A. Dr. William T. Hogarth:

In Dr. Hogarth’s lengthy and convoluted testimony, he, in effect, admitted defeat in his year-long, monumental, international effort to craft a compromise with Japan over the issues of small-type coastal whaling and unregulated lethal “research” whaling which could be acted on at the forthcoming 2009 Annual Meeting of the IWC.

Hogarth’s testimony clearly indicated that the failure of negotiations was primarily due to the utter intransigence of Japan in refusing to accept (1) any restrictive regulation of coastal whaling, (2) any restrictive regulation of so-called “scientific” research whaling, or (3) any international enforcement provisions, all of which other countries rightly insisted upon.

The Small Working Group had adopted a method of work on the understanding that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.” Recognizing “the significant achievements that have occurred over the past year,” Hogarth nevertheless acknowledged that “there is disappointment among IWC members, including the United States, that the SWG did not make more progress on the critical issues facing the Commission.”

Dr. Hogarth asserted: “The Obama Administration would like to see the International Whaling Commission serve as the premiere international forum to resolve current whale conservation issues, coordinate critical research, and address emerging issues for whales such as climate change and ocean noise. The Administration reaffirms the United States’ position that the commercial whaling moratorium is a necessary conservation measure and believes that lethal scientific whaling is unnecessary in modern whale conservation management.”

He also stated: “The Administration reserves judgment on various proposals regarding a way forward on the IWC until discussions are completed, which, in its view, must occur before the annual meeting in 2010. . . . The Administration will evaluate its options and seek public input before making any decision.”

[RB comment: That’s where we come in, folks! We have a reprieve of one year to turn things around and get the IWC headed in the right conservation direction for the 21st Century.]

B. Kitty Block:

Testifyng on behalf of the Humane Society of the United States and its international arm and more than 11 million members and supporters, and representing a large number of other Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s -- “civil society”), Kitty Block presented a cogent affirmation of the need “for the United States to act decisively to set a course that leads to an end to commercial whaling by all nations.”

Her concluding statement asserted positively: “We can build on what Dr. Hogarth has started, by adopting a robust process that is truly forward thinking and one that embraces the widely held view that whales should no longer be slaughtered for commercial gain. The IWC needs to be modernized and strengthened and whales fully protected from all commercial hunting -- anything less is unacceptable.”

C. Dr. C. Scott Baker:

A detailed analysis, from a scientific point of view, of the issues facing the IWC was presented by Oregon State University marine scientist Dr. C. Scott Baker, who has been a member of the IWC Scientific Committee since 1994. He raised in-depth, science-based objections to critical elements in proposals being considered in relation to Japan’s “small-type” coastal whaling, scientific whaling as an “abuse of intent,” and commercial “by-catch whaling.” He also reviewed the role of forensic genetics and market surveys in observation and inspection.

Finally, he underscored the need for promoting and funding conservation science of living whales as a new direction for the IWC. “If the IWC is going to be relevant to the future,” Dr. Baker concluded, “it must move beyond the reactionary responses to the demands of whaling nations, and take up a more pro-active response to the conservation of living whales and the changing ecosystem.”

The highly significant Opening Statement by Subcommittee Chairperson Madeleine Bordallo

The letter to President Obama from 35 members of Congress

The House Natural Resources Committee web site:

http://resourcescommittee.house.gov

RB-5/22/-09