DOCSLIB.ORG

AWI-1980-IR.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AWI-1980-IR.Pdf IOMAIO EO AIMA WEAE ISIUE .O. x 60 Whntn, .C. 2000 lA.Spt. l. 2, . "No" says Canada to a whaling moratorium n Cnd d th? 80 h bn bd r fr th hl. lln th prr was 14 Yes, 6 No. Had Canada voted d n , th r tn f th Intrntnl Whln the other way, the figures would have Cn —hld n rhtn, Enlnd, l 226—prvd read 15 Yes, 5 No—so achieving the b llrnd dppntnt. t th ddt vnt f th 3/4 majority which the IWC requires to tn, nd th n hh t nrd nrvtnt, make quota changes. Thus Canada's No spelled Yes to the question wheth- th l b nl vt f th prpl fr rtr n th er sperm whales in large numbers lln f pr hl. h vlln f th p nn (1,320 in the coming season) should hln ntn: Cnd. continue to be killed for their sperm oil, a substance for which wholly adequate Over the years Canada's voting rec- Canada voted Yes and supported the substitutes now exist. ord on moratorium issues has been proposal with passion and eloquence. Why did Canada act this way? Can- peculiar —to put it kindly. Since 1973 Last year, 1979, a similar proposal was ada's government-appointed advisory there have been several moratorium put to the IWC. Canada abstained. body, the Ctt n Whl nd votes at the IWC. And since then a This year Canada voted No to that Whln, had recommended that number of countries have moved from proposal and No again to the call for a Canada should support ll morato- the No camp to the Yes. Canada alone ban on the killing of sperm whales, the riums scheduled for debate at the IWC has moved in the opposite direction. most hard-pressed of all the whales still meeting. The Canadian cabinet vetoed In 1973 a total moratorium on ll commercially hunted. this. It instructed the Canadian Com- commercial whaling was proposed. The vote on the sperm whale ban missioner, Mr. Malcolm Mercer, to vote in accord with the IWC Scientific Committee's recommendations— except where they were equivocal. In those instances, the cabinet said, he should support those scientists press- ing for a more conservationist position. The Scientific Committee's Report states that some scientists favored a sperm whale moratorium on the grounds of inadequate data and a poor "biological model." Other scien- tists were against, arguing that uncer- tainty varied and that a blanket mora- torium was therefore unjustified. However, despite this divergence of opinion, the Scientific Committee rec- ommended zero quotas in two out of three areas in which sperm whales are 1-runted. For the third area, the North Atlantic fished by Icelandic and Span- ish whalers, the uncertainties were so great that the Committee simply urged that the average catch of recent years ntrtr td th l tn f th IWC drtz th rl f th nn ntn should not be exceeded. —Sth Afr, r, USS, pn, Kr, Cnd, Spn, Chl, nd Ilnd—h vtd nt rldd rl hln rtr. pht b hn . nt. Cntnd n p r t e Waig Commissio— ow i woks h Intrntnl Whln because IWC quotas have to be n bhd Cn, brn n 48, t agreed by a 3/4 majority, the whaling vr r t r n hln nations—though in a minority—can U.S. n fr t rrt t fr th flln 2 prove and do prove hard bargainers. ldrhp nth: h n t ll, ht In short, the New Management Pro- p nd hr. Otnbl th cedure has brought few changes. Poli- Most endangered of all whales on IWC xt t "nrv" hl tics still dominate. True, the overall which IWC sets a quota is the bow- ppltn tht hlr quota drops year by year. But while head, a species decimated by com- prpr. In th t h fld d this downward trend is partly due to mercial whalers in the 19th Century ll. h hln ndtr conservationist pressure, it is chiefly and still killed by Alaskan Eskimos us- n n t dth thr. ing a curious weaponry manufactured IWC IE - U in Pennsylvania which exactly repli- Far from conserving whales (if only cates that used by the Yankee whalers for the sake of the whaling nations), 0 Whln tn who undermined the species' sur- the IWC has presided over the de- rzl Sth Kr vivability. Chl r struction of the great whales to the nr r Nemesis of U.S. leadership in the point of "commercial extinction." As Commission is the conflict between Ilnd Spn their populations have collapsed, so pn USS the Scientific Committee's repeated the industry—through the IWC—has recommendation of a zero quota on striven to stay afloat by switching at- 4 nWhln tn bowheads and the demands of the Arntn On tention to the lesser whales. Minke Eskimos, backed up by court chal- Atrl Shll whales were only marginally exploited lenges for the right to take numbers Cnd Sth Afr until recently. Now they are the prime rn Sdn greatly exceeding those killed in the target of the whalers' harpoons. Mx Stzrlnd 1940's, 50's and 60's. A more rational corrective to the Conservationist concern, directed at thrlnd UK gross overhunting of the past lies in the lnd USA U.S. Commissioner Richard Frank, IWC's so-called New Management was expressed succinctly in the foot- Procedure which lays down certain due to the continued failure of the high words "No Bowhead Trade-Off' rules to make the recommendations of IWC to "conserve" whale populations. which demonstrators outside the IWC its scientists more "scientific." This is a Continued whaling will lead only to meeting attached to "Flo," a 40-foot great step forward—in theory. the death of whales and whalers. But balloon in the shape of the whale that In practice, however, the political while the whaling industry is past sav- has haunted IWC meetings for the make-up of the Scientific Committee ing, the whales are not. Not yet, not past four years. The phrase refers to plus the shortage of hard data too quite. A moratorium could just save the fact that Japan and Russia always often make for confused and flabby the whales. Nothing less will do. We support the United States in getting a recommendations. Presented with must all start working now to make quota on bowheads for Alaskan Eski- ambiguous advice, Commissioners next year "The Year We Saved the mos, while U.S. leadership in the can interpret it as they will. And Whale." Commission has slackened since 1977 when the bowhead issue first came to a head. In that year the Commission voted a zero quota, and lawyers for the newly formed Alaskan Eskimo Whaling this year for a quota of 10 humpback Commission fought to force the whales for Greenland fishermen. United States to file an objection to the Without the U.S. vote, this quota IWC decision. The issue was carried all would not have been approved by the the way to the Supreme Court. Al- Commission. though they lost the legal battle, Canada does not permit Canadian counsel for the Eskimos has heavily in- native peoples to kill bowhead whales. fluenced the actions of the U.S. Com- However, she unilaterally set a quota missioner. The Commission narrowly of 40 beluga whales in the Cumber- escaped adjourning with no quota on land Sound area, despite the fact that bowheads this year—the most dan- IWC's Scientific Committee recom- gerous possible result for these endan- mended a zero quota for these whales. gered whales. Finally, a three-year Canada's rationale on this matter is quota, which represents a small reduc- bizarre. In a vehement speech, Cana- tion from the current quota, was voted: dian Commissioner Mercer asserted 45 bowheads landed or 65 struck and that beluga whales and narwhals are lost. not whales and, therefore, must not be vl f th bhd under IWC control. Despite a scholarly presentation by Sweden's Alternate fr th nrvtn t bttl Srtr f Cr hlp M. Kltz fr th nxt thr r hld Commissioner, Mrs. K. Mannheimer, nd nd Chrtn Stvn d th pbl rrtn f the Commission did not include belu- l tn f th IWC. th r tht U.S. ldrhp fr th hl. gas and narwhals in the IWC schedule. trn U.S. ldrhp rtl t th It should also make possible a The struck-and-lost rate for these small nrvtn f th rld hl. change in the embarrassing U.S. vote whales in the aboriginal fishery is high. pht b nld . ll 2 n n prttn fr Cnr Since late in the nineteenth century, the bulk of wildlife conservation in America has consisted of the propaga- tion of the 13 so-called "game" spe- cies, primarily deer and ducks. To pro- vide prime habitats for these few species, millions of acres of forest have been bull-dozed, burned or flooded, destroying the habitats of all other animals, e.g., chipmunks, frogs, turtles, snakes, and field mice, with fledgling birds and newborn mammals especial- ly vulnerable. The effect of these manipulations on such species is vir- tually unknown. But wildlife conservation is about to take a step forward in this country. Congress has passed a sort of Equal Opportunity Act for nongame wildlife, ll fr pn hr "The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of 1980." While the funding d rd hp authorization is small compared with expenditures for game species, past Untl rntl, th brbrt f lld prdtr "ntrl"— "game favoritism" will nevertheless be brnn, htn, trppn nd pnn f t nd thr slightly diluted.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, Signed at Washington Under Date of December 2, 1946
    1946 INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION FOR THE REGULATION OF WHALING Adopted in Washington, USA on 2 December 1946 [http://iwcoffice.org/commission/convention.htm] ARTICLE I ................................................................................................................................. 4 ARTICLE II ................................................................................................................................ 4 ARTICLE III ............................................................................................................................... 4 ARTICLE IV ............................................................................................................................... 5 ARTICLE V ................................................................................................................................ 5 ARTICLE VI ............................................................................................................................... 6 ARTICLE VII .............................................................................................................................. 7 ARTICLE VIII ............................................................................................................................. 7 ARTICLE IX ............................................................................................................................... 7 ARTICLE X ...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdsourcing Modern and Historical Data Identifies Sperm Whale
    ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 15 September 2016 doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00167 Crowdsourcing Modern and Historical Data Identifies Sperm Whale (Physeter macrocephalus) Habitat Offshore of South-Western Australia Christopher M. Johnson 1, 2, 3*, Lynnath E. Beckley 1, Halina Kobryn 1, Genevieve E. Johnson 2, Iain Kerr 2 and Roger Payne 2 1 School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA, Australia, 2 Ocean Alliance, Gloucester, MA, USA, 3 WWF Australia, Carlton, VIC, Australia The distribution and use of pelagic habitat by sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) is poorly understood in the south-eastern Indian Ocean off Western Australia. However, a variety of data are available via online portals where records of historical expeditions, commercial whaling operations, and modern scientific research voyages can now be accessed. Crowdsourcing these online data allows collation of presence-only information Edited by: of animals and provides a valuable tool to help augment areas of low research effort. Rob Harcourt, Four data sources were examined, the primary one being the Voyage of the Odyssey Macquarie University, Australia expedition, a 5-year global study of sperm whales and ocean pollution. From December Reviewed by: 2001 to May 2002, acoustic surveys were conducted along 5200 nautical miles of Clive Reginald McMahon, Sydney Institute of Marine Science, transects off Western Australia including the Perth Canyon and historical whaling grounds Australia off Albany; 60 tissue biopsy samples were also collected. To augment areas not surveyed Gail Schofield, Deakin University, Australia by the RV Odyssey, historical Yankee whaling data (1712–1920), commercial whaling *Correspondence: data (1904–1999), and citizen science reports of sperm whale sightings (1990–2003) Christopher M.
    [Show full text]
  • The Action Plan for Australian Cetaceans J L Bannister,* C M Kemper,** R M Warneke***
    The Action Plan for Australian Cetaceans J L Bannister,* C M Kemper,** R M Warneke*** *c/- WA Museum, Francis Street, Perth WA 6000 ** SA Museum, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5000 ***Blackwood Lodge, RSD 273 Mount Hicks Road, Yolla Tasmania 7325 Australian Nature Conservation Agency September 1996 The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Commonwealth Government, the Minister for the Environment, Sport and Territories, or the Director of National Parks and Wildlife. ISBN 0 642 21388 7 Published September 1996 © Copyright The Director of National Parks and Wildlife Australian Nature Conservation Agency GPO Box 636 Canberra ACT 2601 Cover illustration by Lyn Broomhall, Perth Copy edited by Green Words, Canberra Printer on recycled paper by Canberra Printing Services, Canberra Foreword It seems appropriate that Australia, once an active whaling nation, is now playing a leading role in whale conservation. Australia is a vocal member of the International Whaling Commission, and had a key role in the 1994 declaration of the Southern Ocean Sanctuary. The last commercial Australian whaling station ceased operations in Albany in 1978, and it is encouraging to see that once heavily exploited species such as the southern right and humpback whales are showing signs of recovery. Apart from the well-known great whales, Australian waters support a rich variety of cetaceans: smaller whales, dolphins, porpoises and killer whales. Forty-three of the world’s 80 or so cetacean species are found in Australia. This diversity is a reflection of our wide range of coastal habitats, and the fact that Australia is on the main migration route of the great whales from their feeding grounds in the south to warmer breeding grounds in northern waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Sharing the Catches of Whales in the Southern Hemisphere
    SHARING THE CATCHES OF WHALES IN THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE S.J. Holt 4 Upper House Farm,Crickhowell, NP8 1BZ, Wales (UK) <[email protected]> 1. INTRODUCTION What historians have labelled modern whaling is largely a twentieth century enterprise. Its defining feature is the cannon-fired harpoon with an explosive head, launched from a motorised catcher boat.1 This system was first devised about 1865 by Svend Foyn, the son of a ship-owner from Tønsberg, in Vestfold, southeast Norway. Foyn believed that “God had let the whale inhabit the waters for the benefit and blessing of mankind, and consequently I considered it my vocation to promote these fisheries”. He has been described as “...a man with great singularity of vision, since virtually everything he did ...was dedicated to the profitable killing of whales”. Foyn’s system allowed for the first time the systematic hunting and killing of the largest and fastest swimming species of whales, the rorquals, a sub-class of whalebone whales (Mysticetes spp.). The basic technology was supplemented by significant developments in cabling, winches and related hardware and in processing. Powered vessels could not only tow the dead rorquals back to land bases quickly and thus in good condition for processing, but could provide ample compressed air to keep them afloat. Modern whaling could not, however, have become a major industry world-wide, without other technological developments. Other kinds of whales had already been killed in enormous numbers, primarily for their oil, for over a century.2 In 1905 it was discovered that oil from baleen whales could be hydrogenated and the resulting product could be used in the manufacture of soap and food products.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimates of the Current Global Population Size and Historical Trajectory for Sperm Whales
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Vol. 242: 295–304, 2002 Published October 25 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Estimates of the current global population size and historical trajectory for sperm whales Hal Whitehead1, 2,* 1Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax B3H4JI, Nova Scotia, Canada 2Max Planck Institute for Behavioural Physiology, PO Box 1564, 82305 Starnberg, Germany ABSTRACT: Assessments of sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus abundance based on invalid analyses of whaling data are common in the literature. Modern visual surveys have produced popu- lation estimates for a total of 24% of the sperm whale’s global habitat. I corrected these assessments for whales missed on the track line and then used 3 methods to scale up to a global population. Scal- ing using habitat area, plots of 19th century catches and primary production produced consistent global population estimates of about 360 000 whales (CV = 0.36). This is approximately 20% of the numbers reproduced in current literature from invalid whaling-based estimates. A population model, based on that used by the International Whaling Commission’s Scientific Committee, and which con- siders uncertainty in population parameters and catch data, was used to estimate population trajec- tories. Results suggest that pre-whaling numbers were about 1 110 000 whales (95% CI: 672 000 to 1512 000), and that the population was about 71% (95% CI: 52 to 100%) of its original level in 1880 as open-boat whaling drew to a close and about 32% (95% CI: 19 to 62%) of its original level in 1999, 10 yr after the end of large-scale hunting.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rms – a Question of Confidence?
    THE RMS – A QUESTION OF CONFIDENCE? - Manipulations and Falsifications in Whaling A review by Dr. Sandra Altherr, Kitty Block and Sue Fisher - 2 - RMS: A Question of Confidence? – Manipulations and Falsifications in Whaling Content 1. The RMS Process in 2005 and Remaining Questions ................................................................................ 3 2. RMP................................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.1. Tuning Level ............................................................................................................................................. 4 2.2. Phasing in the RMP.................................................................................................................................. 4 2.3. Current RMS Discussion on the RMP....................................................................................................... 4 3. Catch Verification through International Observers................................................................................... 5 3.1. Misreporting and Underreporting in Past Whaling Activities ..................................................................... 5 3.2. Manipulations of Sex Ratio and Body-Length Data .................................................................................. 6 3.3. Hampering of Inspectors and Observers .................................................................................................. 7 3.4.
    [Show full text]
  • Whales and Whaling in the Western Pacific
    "Fast fisk!" is the cry as the harpoon goes home unvisited by the Nantucket and New Bedford whalers, who reached their hey­ day in 1846 with no less than 730 vessels engaged in this trade and taking £1,400,000 worth of whale products in that one year alone. The ultimate effect of this immense onslaught on the whale population will be dealt with later. Because of the annual arrival of large numbers of the Southern right whales in Tasmania and New Zealand, there de­ veloped so-called "bay" or "shore" whaling in these countries in which the whales were captured only short dis­ tances from the coast. Types of Whales Hunted Only three species were hunted on a really large scale; the sperm, Southern right, and humpback whales. The sperm or cachalot (Physeter catodon) reaches a length of 60 feet in the male but only 30 to 35 feet in the female and has a very narrow sledge-like lower jaw with from 20 to 25 pairs of teeth, which pro­ vide the "ivory" described later. In the head also were the gummy, fatty sperma­ ceti from the lower or "junk" part and Whales and Whaling in the very valuable sperm oil from the "case" in the upper portion. This sperm oil was the source of the spermaceti candles from which the original unit of the Western Pacific light, "candle power," was calculated. It is interesting to note that the term "sperm whale" is derived from the odd By R. J. A. W. Lever idea of the old-time whalers that the spermaceti was actually the creature's sperm—the French were less imaginative The literature of whaling deals either with the early efforts and used the word "cachalot." The average quantity of oil obtained from in the Arctic with the hand-harpooning of Greenland whales one whale was six tons but a figure of from open boats or tvith the much later campaigns in 15 tons was sometimes reached.
    [Show full text]
  • Productivity and the Decline of American Sperm Whaling George W
    Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review Volume 2 | Issue 2 Article 7 9-1-1972 Productivity and the Decline of American Sperm Whaling George W. Shuster Follow this and additional works at: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/ealr Part of the Environmental Law Commons, Law and Economics Commons, and the Natural Resources Law Commons Recommended Citation George W. Shuster, Productivity and the Decline of American Sperm Whaling, 2 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 345 (1972), http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/ealr/vol2/iss2/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PRODUCTIVITY AND THE DECLINE OF AMERICAN SPERM WHALING By George W. Shuster'*' But still another inquiry remains; one often agitated by the more recondite Nantucketers .... whether Leviathan can long en­ dure so wide a chase, and so remorseless a havoc; whether he must not at last be exterminated from the waters, and the last whale, like the last man, smoke his last pipe, and then himself evaporate in the final puff. -Herman Melville, Moby Dick) 1851 INTRODUCTION Ever since man discovered he could learn by his mistakes, the analysis of failures has proved to be as productive as the analysis of success. Santayana stated that those who have no knowledge of history are condemned to repeat it. Thus a necessary function of the economic historian has always been the study of prior declines and falls.
    [Show full text]
  • Physeter Macrocephalus – Sperm Whale
    Physeter macrocephalus – Sperm Whale Assessment Rationale Although the population is recovering, commercial whaling in the Antarctic within the last three generations (82 years) reduced the global abundance of species significantly. As commercial whaling has ceased, the species is evaluated under the A1 criterion. Model results revealed a 6% probability for Endangered, a 54% probability of Vulnerable, and a 40% probability of Near Threatened. Thus, the species is listed as Vulnerable A1d based on historical decline in line with the global assessment. Circumpolar surveys estimate around 8,300 mature males, which is extrapolated to around 40,000 Peter Allinson individuals in total. Within the assessment region, the historical depletion may have created a skewed sex ratio, which may make this species more vulnerable to minor Regional Red List status (2016) Vulnerable A1d* threats. For example, systematic surveys from the National Red List status (2004) Vulnerable A2bd Antarctic showed no significant population increase between 1978 and 1992. Recent modelling results Reasons for change No change corroborate the Sperm Whale’s slow recovery rate, where Global Red List status (2008) Vulnerable A1d a small decrease in adult female survivorship could lead to a declining population. Ongoing loss of mature individuals TOPS listing (NEMBA) (2007) None from entanglement in fishing nets and plastic ingestion CITES listing (1981) Appendix I could be hindering population recovery in certain areas. Furthermore, marine noise pollution may be an emerging
    [Show full text]
  • Sperm Whale Diet in New Zealand
    Thesis submitted to Auckland University of Technology in partial fulfilment of the degree of Master of Applied Science Sperm whale diet in New Zealand Felipe Gómez-Villota 2007 Table of contents Attestation of authorship .................................................................................... i List of abbreviations.......................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements............................................................................................ i Abstract ........................................................................................................... iii Introduction.........................................................................................................2 1.1 Objectives and thesis structure...................................................................3 1.2 Thesis outline..............................................................................................4 Literature review .................................................................................................8 2.1 Sperm whale biology ..................................................................................8 2.1.1 Anatomy of the sperm whale.............................................................8 2.1.2 Distribution and migration ...............................................................12 2.1.3 Social structure ...............................................................................15 2.1.4 Diving behaviour .............................................................................17
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution of Sperm Whale Stocks in the North Pacific
    DISTRIBUTION OF SPERM WHALE STOCKS IN THE NORTH PACIFIC TOSHIO KASUYA * AND TO MIO MIYASHITA* ABSTRACT Two contrary opinions on the segregation pattern of sperm whale stocks in the North Pacific, i.e. longitudinal vs. latitudinal, were tested using whaling operation data, results of recent sighting cruises, and movements of marked whales. While Japanese coastal sperm whaling was exploiting the breeding schools, the operation gradually changed from summer to winter and from north to south. In the late 1950s and 1960s most of the whales were taken during summer in the cold Oyashio Current area. During the 1970s whales were taken in the warm Kuroshio Current area in summer and in the Oyashio area in other seasons. In the 1980s most of the whaling occur­ red in the Kuroshio Current area during the winter. The last phase is certainly undesirable for the industry using whaling stations opened for the northern ground. In recent years sperm whale sightings are rare in summer in the previous whaling grounds north of the Kuroshio Current and its extension. These changes in the whaling operation and the whale distribution are explained by assuming two latitudinally segregating sperm whale stocks and earlier depletion of the northern one. In the summer adult males move to colder waters segregating from their breeding population as well as adult males of different stocks. This is supported by additional informa­ tion from blood types, movement of marked whales, operation of Japanese pelagic whaling, and recent whale sightings. We further deduced that the eastern North Pacific is probably inhabited by a single sperm whale stock, although presence of some local stocks is not fully excluded.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Whales
    TheThe GreatGreat WhalesWhales AA CurriculumCurriculum forfor GradesGrades 6–96–9 VICKI OSIS AND SUSAN LEACH SNYDER, RACHEL GROSS, BILL HASTIE, BETH BROADHURST OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY MARINE MAMMAL PROGRAM The Great Whales This curriculum was produced for the Oregon State University Marine Mammal Institute Dr. Bruce Mate, Project Director Acknowledgments Contributions and assistance from the following people and organizations made production of this curriculum possible. Copyright © 2008 Oregon State University Marine Mammal Institute Funded by a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Ocean Explorer Program Artists Reviewers Assistance with Pieter Folkens Barbara Lagerquist scientific data Laura Hauck David Mellinger Dr. Douglas Biggs Tai Kreimeyer Sharon Nieukirk Dr. John Chapman Craig Toll Dr. William Kessler Reviewers/writers Dr. Bruce Mate Photography/illustrations Beth Broadhurst International fund for Animal Bill Hastie Field testers/reviewers Welfare Susan Leach Snyder Jesica Haxel San Diego Natural History Rachel Gross John King Museum Tracie Sempier Design, layout, Christian Tigges Cover photo and editing Eugene Williamson Pieter Folkens Cooper Publishing Theda Hastie Contents 1. Purpose of the Curriculum ...................................................................................... 3 2. Introduction to Whales ............................................................................................. 5 Activity 1: Whale Facts ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]