DOCSLIB.ORG

TWENTY FIFTH MEETING of the COUNCIL 5 – 6 April 2017, Nuuk, Greenland

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TWENTY FIFTH MEETING of the COUNCIL 5 – 6 April 2017, Nuuk, Greenland NAMMCO/25/23 TWENTY FIFTH MEETING OF THE COUNCIL 5 – 6 April 2017, Nuuk, Greenland DOCUMENT 23 MARINE MAMMALS: A MULTIFACETED RESOURCE Submitted by: Planning Group for the Marine Mammals as Food Resources (MMFR) project Action requested: ▪ For information Background: This document has been developed by the Secretariat and it represents part I of the MMFR project. The document has been reviewed by the Planning Group. Marine Mammals: A multifaceted Resource © NAMMCO Greenlandic boy with dried humpback whale meat © F. Ugarte Marine Mammals: A multifaceted Resource 1. Why not consider Marine Mammals? 5 2. Marine Mammals, an Abundant and Logical Resource in the North 6 2.1 An abundant resource in a world of scarcity. 6 2.2 An abundant resource 7 2.2.1 Pinnipeds 7 2.2.2 Cetaceans 9 2.3 A highly valued and therefore carefully managed resource 9 2.3.1 Strict management of resources ensuring healthy stocks 9 2.3.2 A responsibly managed resource – welfare issues 13 3. Marine Mammals, a Green-Blue Resource 15 3.1 A natural Resource 15 3.2 A Resource in balance with the Environment 15 3.3 A Resource contributing to Blue Growth 17 4. Marine Mammals under Threat 18 4.1 A Changing Arctic as Background 19 4.2 Uncontrolled direct removals 19 4.2.1 Ship strikes 20 4.2.2 By-catch and entanglement 20 4.3 Insidious undercover anthropogenic stressors 20 4.3.1 The soft killers: contaminants and microplastics 20 4.3.2 Anthropogenic disturbances 21 4.4 Precautionary management needed and an appeal to join forces 22 5. Marine Mammals, a Healthy Resource with Challenges 23 5.1 Nutritive value 23 5.2 Health benefits 23 5.3 Health concerns: contaminants 24 6. Marine Mammals, a Resource Contributing to Food Security 25 6.1 Food Security – a growing concern 25 6.2 The status of Food Security in the Arctic 25 6.3 Marine Mammals as contributors to Food Security? 27 6.3.1 Stable availability 27 6.3.2 Stable access 28 6.3.3 Stable utilisation 28 7. Marine Mammals, a Source of Identity and Empowerment 29 7.1 A resource entwined with identity: Faroes 30 7.2 A resource entwined with identity and social purpose: Greenland 31 7.3 A resource entwined with avant-garde conservation: Iceland 33 7.4 A resource entwined with small communities’ viability: Norway 35 7.5 A resource empowering small coastal communities 36 8. Whaling and Sealing, Past and Present but Differently 36 8.1 Two different scales of hunting pressure 36 8.2 A strong incentive for sustainability 37 9. Marine Mammals, a Forgotten Resource? 38 9.1 A general attitude against using marine mammals as food resources? 38 9.2 Marine mammals as endangered species? 39 9.3 Are marine mammal supra-mammals? 40 9.3.1 Fascinating animals 40 9.3.2 Fascinating but not “innocent” 41 9.4 An ethical issue? 42 9.5 Another side of ethics - where should the real focus be? 42 10. Conclusion: Marine Mammals – why not? 43 References 45 Appendices 49 North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission 3 | 50 Marine Mammals: A multifaceted Resource 1. WHY NOT CONSIDER MARINE MAMMALS? Since pre-historic times, stranded or hunted marine mammals have represented resources in terms of food and materials for many coastal communities worldwide, as testified by their appearance in rock carvings, legends, writings, literature and art. In the Arctic, their wide distribution and abundance make them the predominant component of the marine ecosystem. Now, as in the past, they are a logical and necessary food resource. Their year-round availability has enabled small, remote and isolated northern coastal communities to survive and to maintain a relatively high degree of self- sufficiency in food production. Small-scale coastal whaling and sealing were not only a source of food, commodities, trading currency and cash, but also represented a cultural and societal keystone and were the mainstay of many coastal communities, particularly in Greenland. Subsistence coastal whaling and sealing were conducted in a largely sustainable manner, but became undermined as commercial whaling and sealing developed. The large scale systematic hunting for profit lead to serious declines in many of the world’s populations of marine mammals, to the point of collapse of most of the major whale stocks and the extinction of some pinniped species. As a result, marine mammal hunting became a worldwide symbol of mismanagement and abuse of natural resources. The emergence of the modern environmental ethic coupled with the development of precautionary and effective management procedures (by population and stock), as well as the demise of the demand for whale and seal oil, brought an end to large scale whaling and sealing by the mid-1980s. Although a few remain critically endangered, many stocks of marine mammals have since recovered from exploitation and are considered healthy (Gambell 1999, Clapham et al. 1999, Costa et al. 2006, Laidre et al. 2015, Thomas et al. 2015, Clapham 2016, IWC1 20162, Smith et al. in UN3 2016) and are thus able to sustain controlled removals. Today whaling and sealing are still a reality for many northern coastal communities, simply because marine mammals are present, nearby and abundant, and therefore a logical resource to use in an environment of scarcity. They continue to represent an invaluable resource providing food and/or income, as well as job opportunities in places where non-marine resources are limited and/or employment opportunities are few. Although the capacity for sustainable management has been built up through progress in the development of precautionary management procedures, targeted stocks are healthy, and locally sustainably exploited marine mammals represent an ecosystem-friendly, low-carbon footprint resource, the exploitation of marine mammals remains controversial and demonised, stamped as uncivilised and barbaric – barely acceptable as subsistence activities for those marginal “aboriginals” or “natives”. Food insecurity is recognised as one of the major concerns of the 21st century and is, particularly in the Arctic, exacerbated by climate change. Some marine mammals represent valuable potential contributors to food security in many places. Nevertheless, they are ignored as potential food resources in the general discourse on food security (Godfray et al. 2010, UN 2014, 2015, FAO 2016, Potts et al. 2016, WEF 2016). The UN General Assembly (UN 2014) recognises the important role played by seafood in global food security and defines seafood as including “all marine living resources used for food, including fish, shellfish, crustaceans, marine mammals, sea turtles and algae (our emphasis)”. 1 International Whaling Commission 2 https://iwc.int/status, retrieved June 2016 3 United Nations North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission 5 | 50 Marine Mammals: A multifaceted Resource It underlines that “this definition promotes a holistic view of the contribution of seafood to global food security”. Marine mammals are mentioned as a possible important source of nutrition, in particular for certain groups of indigenous peoples and it is also noted that they are not as widely consumed for a variety of reasons. After this mention, however, the potential of marine mammals as contributors to food security is simply not examined further. With a focus on the northern regions, we examine the potential of marine mammals as a food resource in the light of both the “blue economy” and climate and environmental change, in an environmental, dietary and societal perspective. We look at their abundance, our ability to manage them sustainably, their ecological footprint and explore why marine mammal resources are currently ignored in the context of food security. Petroglyph from South Norway depicting a whale. 2. MARINE MAMMALS, AN ABUNDANT AND LOGICAL RESOURCE IN THE NORTH Marine mammals have been and are still consumed as human food all around the world (e.g., Shoemaker 2005, Robards and Reeves 2011). In the northern latitudes, marine mammals have, however, acquired a special significance because of their abundance when compared to the scarcity of land resources. 2.1 AN ABUNDANT RESOURCE IN A WORLD OF SCARCITY. The Arctic environment of the NAMMCO countries is characterised by an inhospitable environment and climate, with limited usable land resources. Both flora and fauna in this environment have low diversity and quantity, and are limited by a short summer growing season. In sharp contrast, the marine environment bursts with diverse and abundant resources, including fish, crustaceans, sea birds and marine mammals. The fish fauna is, however, impoverished compared to lower latitudes, although a few important species abound in some areas. Sometimes these abundant fish species occur in deeper waters, which until relatively recently could not be effectively taken with indigenous fishing technology (e.g. Greenland halibut, shrimp and crab). In contrast to the limited fish resources, several species of marine mammals (seals and whales) are permanent residents accessible to hunters. Migratory warm-blooded species (including birds and whales) arrive also in abundance in the summer months to feed on the seasonally available marine invertebrates (Freeman 2001). Animal diets, including those of humans, reflect the resource availability within their specific environments, leading to geographical variation within and between species. Human diets in the Arctic have been and still are dominated by marine resources and technical limitations in fishing methods North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission 6 | 50 Marine Mammals: A multifaceted Resource dictated that until recently they were heavily centred upon marine mammals. The reliance on locally available resources is reinforced by limitations in transport infrastructure due to the large distances between northern settlements and the harsh landscape. In Greenland, for example, no roads connect the towns on the mainland. Many communities are isolated for months of the year due to the presence of sea ice, and food shipments can’t get through by sea.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mahimahi (Coryphaenamahimahi Hippurus)
    mahimahi (CoryphaenaMahimahi hippurus) Mahimahi is the Hawaiian of Hawaii’s commercial landings Quality name that has become the common of mahimahi. Trollers catch nearly market name for this fish. It is also 40% of the landings. Schools of ma- Fresh mahimahi has a shelf life of known as dorado or dolphin (the himahi are common around flotsam 10 days if properly cared for. The fish, not the mammal) in other parts drifting at sea and near fish aggre- fish caught by trolling are only one of the country. When a mahimahi gation buoys. or two days on ice when landed and are typically fresher than the ma- takes the hook, its colors are bril- Although mahimahi have been liant blue and silver dappled with himahi caught by longline boats on raised successfully in tanks from extended trips. yellow. These fade quickly when the eggs to adults, the high cost has fish dies. made commercial aquaculture un- The first external evidence of de- Seasonality & How feasible to date. terioration in a whole mahimahi is They Are Caught softening and fading of bright skin Distribution: colors. In a dressed fish, discolor- Availability and Seasonality: The popularity of fresh mahimahi ation of the flesh exposed around Locally-caught mahimahi is avail- in the tourist industry and with resi- the collar bone would indicate a loss able most of the year, with peak dents has created a steady demand of quality. Mahimahi retains better catches usually March to May and for this fish and consistently good quality if it is not filleted until short- from September to November.
    [Show full text]
  • Consumption Impacts by Marine Mammals, Fish, and Seabirds on The
    83 Consumption impacts by marine mammals, fish, and seabirds on the Gulf of Maine–Georges Bank Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) complex during the years 1977–2002 W. J. Overholtz and J. S. Link Overholtz, W. J. and Link, J. S. 2007. Consumption impacts by marine mammals, fish, and seabirds on the Gulf of Maine–Georges Bank Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) complex during the years 1977–2002. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 64: 83–96. A comprehensive study of the impact of predation during the years 1977–2002 on the Gulf of Maine–Georges Bank herring complex is presented. An uncertainty approach was used to model input variables such as predator stock size, daily ration, and diet composition. Statistical distributions were constructed on the basis of available data, producing informative and uninformative inputs for estimating herring consumption within an uncertainty framework. Consumption of herring by predators tracked herring abundance closely during the study period, as this important prey species recovered following an almost complete collapse during the late 1960s and 1970s. Annual consumption of Atlantic herring by four groups of predators, demersal fish, marine mammals, large pelagic fish, and seabirds, averaged just 58 000 t in the late 1970s, increased to 123 000 t between 1986 and 1989, 290 000 t between 1990 and 1994, and 310 000 t during the years 1998–2002. Demersal fish consumed the largest proportion of this total, followed by marine mammals, large pelagic fish, and seabirds. Sensitivity analyses suggest that future emphasis should be placed on collecting time-series of diet composition data for marine mammals, large pelagic fish, and seabirds, with additional monitoring focused on the abundance of seabirds and daily rations of all groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Toxic Menu – Contamination of Whale Meat
    Toxic Menu Contamination of Whale Meat and Impact on Consumers’ Health ry, P rcu CB e a m n d n i D h D c i T . R wh at ale me A review by Dr. Sandra Altherr and Sigrid Lüber Baird‘s beaked whale, hunted and consumed in Japan, despite high burdens of PCB and mercury © Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) © 2009, 2012 (2nd edition) Title: Jana Rudnick (Pro Wildlife), Photo from EIA Text: Dr. Sandra Altherr (Pro Wildlife) and Sigrid Lüber (OceanCare) Pro Wildlife OceanCare Kidlerstr. 2, D-81371 Munich, Germany Oberdorfstr. 16, CH-8820 Wädenswil, Switzerland Phone: +49(089)81299-507 Phone: +41 (044) 78066-88 [email protected] [email protected] www.prowildlife.de www.oceancare.org Acknowledgements: The authors want to thank • Claire Bass (World Society for the Protection of Animals, UK) • Sakae Hemmi (Elsa Nature Conservancy, Japan) • Betina Johne (Pro Wildlife, Germany) • Clare Perry (Environmental Investigation Agency, UK) • Annelise Sorg (Canadian Marine Environment Protection Society, Canada) and other persons, who want to remain unnamed, for their helpful contribution of information, comments and photos. - 2 - Toxic Menu — Contamination of Whale Meat and Impact on Consumers’ Health Content 1. Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 2. Contaminants and pathogens in whales .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the EXPERT MEETING to DEVELOP TECHNICAL GUIDELINES to REDUCE BYCATCH of MARINE MAMMALS in CAPTURE FISHERIES
    FIAO/R1289 (En) FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report ISSN 2070-6987 Report of the EXPERT MEETING TO DEVELOP TECHNICAL GUIDELINES TO REDUCE BYCATCH OF MARINE MAMMALS IN CAPTURE FISHERIES Rome, Italy, 17−19 September 2019 Cover illustration: Alberto Gennari (2019) FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report No. 1289 FIAO/R1289 (En) Report of the EXPERT MEETING TO DEVELOP TECHNICAL GUIDELINES TO REDUCE BYCATCH OF MARINE MAMMALS IN CAPTURE FISHERIES Rome, Italy, 17–19 September 2019 FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Rome, 2020 Required citation: FAO. 2020. Report of the Expert Meeting to Develop Technical Guidelines to Reduce Bycatch of Marine Mammals in Capture Fisheries. Rome, Italy, 17–19 September 2019. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Report No. 1289, Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/CA7620EN The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO. ISBN: 978-92-5-132150-8 ISSN: 2070-6987 (print) © FAO, 2020 Some rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Orange Roughy New Zealand
    Orange Roughy Hoplostethus atlanticus Image ©Monterey Bay Aquarium New Zealand Bottom Trawl July 21, 2014 Andy Woolmer and Jess Woo, Consulting Researcher 2 About Seafood Watch® The Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch® program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wild- caught and farmed seafood commonly found in the North American marketplace. Seafood Watch defines sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether wild-caught or farmed, which can maintain or increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected ecosystems. The program’s mission is to engage and empower consumers and businesses to purchase environmentally responsible seafood fished or farmed in ways that minimize their impact on the environment or are in a credible improvement project with the same goal. Each sustainability recommendation is supported by a seafood report. Each report synthesizes and analyzes the most current ecological, fisheries and ecosystem science on a species, then evaluates this information against the program’s Sustainability Criteria to arrive at a recommendation of “Best Choice,” “Good Alternative,” or “Avoid.” In producing the seafood reports, Seafood Watch utilizes research published in academic, peer-reviewed journals whenever possible. Other sources of information include government technical publications, fishery management plans and supporting documents, and other scientific reviews of ecological sustainability. Seafood Watch research analysts also communicate with ecologists, fisheries and aquaculture scientists, and members of industry and conservation organizations when evaluating fisheries and aquaculture practices. Capture fisheries and aquaculture practices are highly dynamic; as the scientific information on each species changes, Seafood Watch’s sustainability recommendations and the underlying seafood reports will be updated to reflect these changes.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Japan Supports Whaling
    An edited version of this paper has been accepted for publication in the Journal of International Wildlife and Policy WHY JAPAN SUPPORTS WHALING Keiko Hirata* 1. INTRODUCTION Japan is one of the few states in the world that adamantly supports whaling. For decades, Tokyo has steadfastly maintained its right to whale and has aggressively lobbied the International Whaling Commission (IWC) for a resumption of commercial whaling. Japan’s pro-whaling stance has invited strong international criticism from both environmental groups and Western governments, many of which view Tokyo as obstructing international efforts to protect whales. Why has Japan adhered to a pro-whaling policy that has brought the country international condemnation? Its defiant pro-whaling stance is not consistent with its internationally cooperative position on other environmental matters. For the past decade, Tokyo has been a key player in international environmental regimes, such as those to combat ozone depletion and global warming.1 If Japan is serious about environmental protection and desires to play a role as a ‘green contributor,’2 why hasn’t it embraced the anti-whaling norm, 3 thereby joining other states in wildlife protection and assuming a larger role in global environmental leadership? *Research Fellow, Center for the Study of Democracy, University of California, Irvine, California, USA. E-mail: [email protected]. 1 Isao Miyaoka, 1980s and Early 1990s: Changing from an Eco-outlaw to a Green Contributor, 16 NEWSL. INST. SOC. SCI. U. TOKYO, 7-10 (1999). 2 Id. at 7. 3 Robert L. Friedheim, Introduction: The IWC as a Contested Regime, in TOWARD A SUSTAINABLE WHALING REGIME, 1-45 (Robert L.
    [Show full text]
  • Number 30 June 2005 ISSN 1192-3539
    Number 30 June 2005 ISSN 1192-3539 Editorial MAKAH TRIBE PURSUES RIGHT TO HUNT The Digest continues to provide news on whaling research to On February 14 2005, the Makah Indian tribe of Washington researchers and libraries in many countries, and we appreciate State filed an application with the National Oceanic and hearing from researchers regarding the work they are doing in Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) requesting a waiver of diverse study areas. We aim to publish information on whaling the take moratorium under the Marine Mammal Protection Act research carried out in the social sciences, history, archeology for a ceremonial and subsistence harvest of up to 20 gray and law, and in other relevant fields (such as, e.g., the whales in any 5-year period. performing and graphic arts). A glance at this issue of the Digest indicates that research on whaling in diverse research The filing of this application is the result of a series of federal fields continues, published and communicated at whaling court rulings in a lawsuit filed by the Fund for Animals and the symposia and workshops, and that whaling and whale cultures Humane Society of the United States on January 10, 2002. The continue in various countries and provide opportunities today most recent court decision on June 7, 2004 left the Makah with for those wanting to study in situ whaling. Readers are two alternatives: (1) comply with the court decision by (a) reminded that the INWR Website, www.ualberta.ca/~inwr/ preparing a full environmental impact statement (EIS) and (b) contains further information on whaling and whaling research, seek either a permit or a permit waiver under the Marine and useful links to other whaling research websites Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) for taking a quota of gray whales; or (2) appeal the court decision to the US Supreme LITTLE DIOMEDE ISLANDERS LAND SEASON’S Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Wasted Catch: Unsolved Problems in U.S. Fisheries
    © Brian Skerry WASTED CATCH: UNSOLVED PROBLEMS IN U.S. FISHERIES Authors: Amanda Keledjian, Gib Brogan, Beth Lowell, Jon Warrenchuk, Ben Enticknap, Geoff Shester, Michael Hirshfield and Dominique Cano-Stocco CORRECTION: This report referenced a bycatch rate of 40% as determined by Davies et al. 2009, however that calculation used a broader definition of bycatch than is standard. According to bycatch as defined in this report and elsewhere, the most recent analyses show a rate of approximately 10% (Zeller et al. 2017; FAO 2018). © Brian Skerry ACCORDING TO SOME ESTIMATES, GLOBAL BYCATCH MAY AMOUNT TO 40 PERCENT OF THE WORLD’S CATCH, TOTALING 63 BILLION POUNDS PER YEAR CORRECTION: This report referenced a bycatch rate of 40% as determined by Davies et al. 2009, however that calculation used a broader definition of bycatch than is standard. According to bycatch as defined in this report and elsewhere, the most recent analyses show a rate of approximately 10% (Zeller et al. 2017; FAO 2018). CONTENTS 05 Executive Summary 06 Quick Facts 06 What Is Bycatch? 08 Bycatch Is An Undocumented Problem 10 Bycatch Occurs Every Day In The U.S. 15 Notable Progress, But No Solution 26 Nine Dirty Fisheries 37 National Policies To Minimize Bycatch 39 Recommendations 39 Conclusion 40 Oceana Reducing Bycatch: A Timeline 42 References ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to thank Jennifer Hueting and In-House Creative for graphic design and the following individuals for their contributions during the development and review of this report: Eric Bilsky, Dustin Cranor, Mike LeVine, Susan Murray, Jackie Savitz, Amelia Vorpahl, Sara Young and Beckie Zisser.
    [Show full text]
  • AWI Comments on Resolution on Food Security (IWC/65/10 Rev
    AWI Comments on Resolution on Food Security (IWC/65/10 Rev 2). Food security is an important issue globally, nationally, and locally. With the exception of aboriginal subsistence whaling, however, the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling which established the International Whaling Commission (IWC) is not – and was It has been well documented that marine fish stocks are never – considered a treaty that included food security in crisis. According to the FAO, the share of marine fish as a primary concern. Instead, there are numerous other stocks that are over-exploited has increased from 10 international conventions, declarations, and agencies percent in 1970 to nearly one third in 2009. A further 52 that have, as their primary focus, food security and percent of fish stocks are considered fully exploited. related issues. Such international fora include, inter alia, According to a 2012 report “Pirate Fishing Exposed – The the Food and Agriculture Organization’s Committee on Fight Against Illegal Fishing in West Africa and the EU” by World Food Security, the International Food Security the Environmental Justice Foundation: Treaty (proposed),1 and the Food Assistance Convention2 (formerly the Food Aid Convention3). Losses (globally) due to IUU fishing are estimated to be between US$10 billion and US$23.5 billion In addition, there are numerous reports and declarations per year, representing between 11 and 26 million on the subject, including a report entitled Sustainable tonnes of fish. West African waters are estimated Contribution
    [Show full text]
  • Meat Consumption from Stranded Whales and Marine Mammals in New Zealand: Public Health and Other Issues
    Meat consumption from stranded whales and marine mammals in New Zealand: Public health and other issues M W Cawthorn Cawthorn & Associates Marine Mammals/Fisheries Consultants 53 Motuhara Road Plimmerton Wellington Published by Department of Conservation Head Office, PO Box 10-420 Wellington, New Zealand This report was commissioned by Hawke's Bay, Wellington and Otago Conservancies ISSN 1171-9834 1997 Department of Conservation, P.O. Box 10-420, Wellington, New Zealand Reference to material in this report should be cited thus: Cawthorn, M.W., 1997 Meat consumption from stranded whales and marine mammals in New Zealand: Public health and other issues. Conservation Advisory Science Notes No. 164, Department of Conservation, Wellington. Keywords: Whales, seals, food preparation (marine mammal), meat quality assessment (marine mammal), flensing, pathogens, contaminants Abstract Interest in the use of stranded whales as a source of food and the use of seals for cultural purposes has been expressed to the Department of Conservation by Ngati Hawea and Ngai Tahu Maori respectively. The known and anecdotal history of consumption of whale and seal meat in New Zealand and elsewhere is briefly discussed. Comments on the palatibility of marine mammal meat and the use of whales and seals as food are presented. Post-stranding damage and carcass contamination result in unsuitability of meat for human consump- tion. Criteria for the assessment of meat quality from stranded animals are presented. The transmission of parasites, particularly Anisakis sp., and the cumulative effects of persistent pesticides and heavy metals from consump- tion of meat from species such as pilot whales is discussed. Meat collection and storage should be conducted under the same conditions and constraints applied to terrestrial mammals.
    [Show full text]
  • CMS 25 YEARS Final
    A special report to mark the Silver Anniversary of the Bonn Convention on Migratory Species (1979–2004) OF JOURNEYS 25 YEARS Convention on Migratory Species United Nations Environment Programme 25 Years A message from the Secretary-General of the United Nations People have long marvelled at the sight of great flocks, shoals or herds of migratory creatures on the move, or have wondered at that movement’s meaning. Published by the Secretariat of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory animals are not only something spectacular to behold from afar; they Migratory Species of Wild Animals are an integral part of the web of life on Earth. Animal migration is essential for (CMS). healthy ecosystems, contributing to their structure and function and visibly Bonn, Germany 2004 connecting one to the other. It is a basis for activities that create livelihoods and support local and global economies. Migratory animals are among the top © 2004 CMS attractions of ecotourism, contributing to sustainable development and national Information in this publication may be wealth. And in many religious and cultural traditions, they stand out in ritual and quoted or reproduced in part or in full lore passed down from generation to generation. provided the source and authorship is As nomads of necessity, these species are highly susceptible to harm caused acknowledged, unless a copyright by destruction of ecosystems. Migratory animals are also threatened by man- symbol appears with the item. made barriers and by unsustainable hunting and fishing practices, including ISBN 3-937429-03-4 ‘bycatch’ in commercial fisheries. People tend to underestimate the vulnerability DISCLAIMER of migratory species, regarding them as hardy and plentiful.
    [Show full text]
  • Driven by Demand
    Driven By Demand Dolphin drive hunts in Japan and the involvement of the aquarium industry WDCS, the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society April 2006 All information in this report may be reproduced for educational purposes provided written credit is given to WDCS. The report itself and photographs contained within it may not be reproduced without the prior written approval of WDCS. We have taken care to ensure the accuracy of information within this report. We are concerned about whale and dolphin hunts wherever they occur, and welcome comments, updates and new information. Please send information to: [email protected]. WDCS UK Brookfield House, 38 St. Paul Street, Chippenham, Wiltshire SN15 1LJ, U.K. Tel: +44 (0)1249 449 500, Fax: +44 (0)1249 449 501, www.wdcs.org WDCS North America 70 East Falmouth Hwy, East Falmouth, MA 02536, USA Tel: +1 508 548 8328, Fax: +1 508 457 1988, www.whales.org WDCS Germany WDCS, Altostr. 43, 81245 Munich, Germany Tel: +49 (0) 89 6100 2393, Fax: +49 (0) 89 6100 2394, www.wdcs-de.org WDCS Australasia WDCS, PO Box 720, Port Adelaide Business Centre, Port Adelaide, South Australia 5015, Australia Tel: 1300 360 442, Fax: 088 44 74 211, www.wdcs.org.au WDCS Argentina WDCS, Francisco Beiro 3731, (B1636CHM) - Olivos, Prov. Buenos Aires, Argentina Tel+Fax: +54 11 479 06 870, www.wdcs.org Acknowledgements This report was written by Courtney S.Vail and Denise Risch, and edited by Cathy Williamson. Japanese translation was provided by: Sakae Hemmi, Elsa Nature Conservancy. Our sincere thanks to Sakae Hemmi, Nanami Kurasawa, Sue Fisher, Mark Simmonds, Hardy Jones, Philippa Brakes, Clare Perry and Nicolas Entrup for their help in the production of this report.
    [Show full text]