Whaling & Whale Management

Home , Bowhead whale, Harpoon cannon

Whale Management & Whaling Whale Management & Whaling

Effective management requires:

1. Clear definition of goals

2. Agreement of user groups

3. Practical strategies that can be implemented and enforced

4. Information feed-back to allow assessment of success U.S. Marine Mammal Management

Marine Mammal Protection Act - 1972

Prohibits taking of all marine mammals

Take means to: harass, hunt, capture or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture or kill

Exceptions: Scientific research Public display Subsistence harvest Commercial fisheries (under certain conditions) Marine Mammal Protection Act

Goals:

Maintain stocks of marine mammals at their Optimum Sustainable Population (OSP) levels

Maintain stocks of marine mammals as functioning elements of their ecosystems Marine Mammal Protection Act

dN/dt

Population Size (N)

MNPL = Maximum Net Productivity Level (like MSY)

OSP = a population size range between the Maximum Net Productivity Level and the carrying capacity of the ecosystem 1994 Amendment of the MMPA Marine mammal Commission defined the following objectives for marine mammal management (Taylor et al. 2000):

(1) maintain the fullest possible range of management options for future generations, (2) restore depleted species and populations of marine mammals to optimum sustainable level with no significant time delays, (3) reduce takes (kills) to as near zero as practicable, and (4) as possible, minimize hardships to commercial fisheries while achieving the previous objectives.

The implementation of this management follows these steps: Preparation of Stock Assessment Reports for all stocks

Reduce mortality to below Potential Biological Removal

Zero Mortality Rate goal within 7 years Assessments by MMPA

PBR = (Nmin) × (½ Rmax) × (Fr) Where:

Nmin = minimum population estimate

rmax = maximum rate of increase

Fr = recovery factor

If anthropogenic mortality > PBR, stock is considered strategic Assessments by MMPA

PBR = (Nmin) × (½ Rmax) × (Fr)

For harbour porpoises in the Gulf of Maine:

Nmin = 48,285 Rmax = 0.04 Fr = 0.5

PBR = (48,289)·(1/2)·(0.04)·(0.5) = 483

Estimated mortality in commercial fisheries in 1997 = 1,570

(1570 > 483) Thus, this stock is considered strategic

Fr = 1, 483 * 2 = 966, still below the mortality (1570)

Fr = 0, 483 * 0 = 0, still below the mortality (1570) 1994 Amendment of the MMPA

Safety factor based on data uncertainty:

Larger CV, lower PBR

Smaller CV, higher PBR

(Taylor et al. 2000) 1994 Amendment of the MMPA For all strategic stocks:

Review stock assessment annually

Establish a Take Reduction Team

Prepare a Take Reduction Plan

Reduce anthropogenic mortality (< PBR within 6 months) Whale Management & Whaling

• Progression of commercial whaling • The International Whaling Commission: success or failure? • Next steps for Whaling How Many Whales are There ?

Name Rating Abundance Fewest Northern right whale 1 450 Southern right whale 2 8,000 1 <1,000 Blue whale 2 10,000 2 <10,000 Bowhead whale 3 20,000 Grey whale 3 22,000 3 <100,000 Humpback whale 3 >50,000 4 <1 million Sei whale 3 53,000 5 everywhere Bryde’s whale 3 63,000 Fin whale 4 141,000 Sperm whale 5 >934,000 Most Minke whale 5 >970,000 Early Whaling

Archaeological evidence of subsistence whaling from Stone Age

Basque whaling in Gulf of Biscay in 10th century

Commercial exploitation of right whales from 12th century

Basque hunt for right & bowhead whales in Labrador from 1530

Between 1530 and 1600: http://www.heritage.nf.ca/ 20,000 bowhead and right whales exploration/basque.html 15 ships and 600 men per season History of Whaling

• 1200s-1600s Basques, Europe to mid-Atlantic to the North Atlantic, overfishing right whales

• 1600s-1700s Spitzbergen [Arctic] & Nantucket [Cape Cod], right & bowhead, 65,000 caught by Dutch alone

• Yankee whaling for sperm whales off New England from 1712

• 1700s-1800s Nantucket sperm whalers expanded to Bahamas, West Indies, Africa, South America… then Pacific and Australia

• Powering the oil lamps of London… History of Whaling

Right and Bowhead whales Right and Bowhead whales

Gray whales

1790

Sperm whales Sperm whales Sequential Depletion

Right + Bowhead whales

Discovery Sperm whales Humpback whales Discovery

Over-exploitation Discovery

Over-exploitation Commercial extinction Over-exploitation

Commercial extinction

Commercial extinction Modern Whaling

Invention of grenade harpoon & use of powered vessels from 1864:

Sailboats  steamships (hunt fast blue and fin whales) Manual harpoon  harpoon cannon with explosive tips

Antarctic whaling initiated in 1904 (in south Georgia)

High-tech operations start in 1920s: - on-board processing on factory-ships - air pumps prevent sinking, fleets of catcher boats, buoy boats

First Convention for the Regulation of Whaling in 1931

Tønnessen & Johnsen 1982. The history of modern whaling International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (1946) ICRW

Designed to promote:

The conservation of whale resources

and

The orderly development of the whaling industry

The Commission: Scientific Committee Financial Committee Technical Committee Rise and fall of the International Whaling Commission (IWC)

“To provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry”

• Formed in 1946, with 14 signatories (all coastal, all whaling nations)

• Regulates whaling around the world

• Scientific Committee provides scientific advice to the political Commission IWC Structure

The “Convention” 88 Members Membership Voluntary

Secretariat in Cambridge

Observers: NGOs

75% majority to change Schedule The “Schedule”

Schedule amended annually

http://www.iwcoffice.org/ IWC Mechanics

Amendments must be passed by a three-quarters majority

Member governments may lodge an objection within 90 days

The IWC has no power to enforce regulations

http://www.iwcoffice.org/ Antigua & Barbuda Dominican Kenya Portugal Republic Argentina Rep of Korea Russia Ecuador Australia Laos Saint Kitts & Nevis Estonia Austria Luxembourg Saint Lucia Finland Belgium Mali Saint Vincent France Belize Marshall Islands San Marino Gabon Benin Mauritania Senegal Gambia Brazil Mexico Slovak Republic Germany Bulgaria Monaco Slovenia Greece Cambodia Mongolia Solomon Islands Grenada Cameroon Morocco South Africa Guinea Chile Nauru Spain Guinea-Bissau PR of China Netherlands Suriname Hungary Costa Rica New Zealand Sweden Iceland Côte d'Ivoire Nicaragua Switzerland India Croatia Norway Togo Ireland Czech Republic Oman Tuvalu Israel Cyprus Palau Uruguay Italy Denmark Panama UK Japan Dominica PR of China USA Kiribati Peru IWC – Management History

• Routine over-exploitation continued for decades • Ban on blue whales and humpback whales in 1960s • Observers halted illegal whaling in 1970s • New Management Procedure 1975/6: era of sustainable whaling • Ten-year moratorium starts in 1985/6: beginning of political stalemate • Revised Management Procedure for continued whaling adopted in 1994, never implemented • Current status: gridlock … therefore moratorium continues indefinitely IWC Blue Whale Units

• Whale stocks limited by an overall TAC measured in Blue Whale Units:

1 blue whale = 2 fin whales = 2.5 humpback = 6 Sei / Bryde’s whales

• What is the problem with this system? The Spectacular Mismanagement of Antarctic Whaling 15 Humpback

0 25 Blue Modern 0 whaling in 25 Fin Antarctic 0 15 Sperm

0 Sei (Catches in (thousands) Catch 15 thousands) 0 7 Minke

0 1905 1915 1925 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 Year

Hilborn et al. (2003) Annual Review of Environment and Resources 28:359-399. Modern Whaling - Removals More than 2,000,000 whales taken from the Southern Hemisphere in 20th century

Fin Sperm Blue Sei Minke Humpback Unspec. Antarctic Bryde S. Hemisphere N. Hemisphere Small Gray Right Bowhead

0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 Total catch (1868-2001) International Whaling Commission, Dec 2002 Illegal Harvests

Catches of the wrong species, and in the wrong areas… until 1980s.

Biological rationale for the lack of a recovery in many species.

Zemsky et al. (1995) Reports of the International Whaling Commission 46: 131-135 IWC Moratorium

Adopted in 1982 - to take effect in 1985-1986

“Notwithstanding the other provisions of paragraph 10, catch limits for the killing for commercial purposes of whales from all stocks for the 1986 coastal and the 1985/86 pelagic seasons and thereafter shall be zero. This provision will be kept under review, based upon the best scientific advice, and by 1990 at the latest the Commission will undertake a comprehensive assessment of the effects of this decision on whale stocks and consider modification of this provision and the establishment of other catch limits.”

http://www.iwcoffice.org/ IWC Moratorium

Objections: Japan (later withdrawn) Norway Peru USSR IWC – Comprehensive Assessment

“an in-depth evaluation of the status of all whale stocks in the light of management objectives and procedures... that ... would include the examination of current stock size, recent population trends, carrying capacity and productivity.”

Implemented the following management schemes:

Management Objectives - Revised Management Procedure

and

Implementation Strategy - Revised Management Strategy Revised Management Procedure

Philosophy:

Provide a balance between conservation & commercial harvest

Allows catch limits to be set with minimal requirements for data

Agreed to in 1991 by Commission Revised Management Procedure

Goals:

(1) Allow recovery of depleted stocks (below 54% of K)

(2) Obtain highest possible stable yield

(3) Maintain exploited stocks at 72% of K Revised Management Strategy

Safeguards:

An effective inspection and observation scheme Arrangements to ensure that total catches over time are within the limits set under the Revised Management Scheme Still no agreement – debate started in 1994 IWC loopholes

• Japan (1073 minke, 100 sei, 50 Bryde’s, 10 fin, 5 sperm)… scientific research • Norway (639 minke)… objected to moratorium • Iceland (30 minke, 9 fin)… objected to moratorium • Russia, USA, Greenland, St Vincent and the Grenadines (177 minke, 55 bowhead, 13 fin)… aboriginal • South Korea + Japan (~340 minke)… accidental fisheries bycatch Scientific Permit Whaling

Research Whaling (Japan)

JARPA – Antarctic minke whales

JARPN – North Pacific minke, Bryde’s, sperm whales

Research Whaling (Norway)

North Atlantic minke whales - ended in 1995 Current Whaling Situation • Since global moratorium on commercial and aboriginal harvest of large whales (1986): 1400 / year

– Norway (not bound my moratorium) • 700 North Atlantic minke whales

– Japan (whaling under scientific permit) • 440 Southern Ocean minke whales • 220 North Pacific minke • 50 Bryde’s • 10 sperm

– Iceland • 38 North Atlantic minke whales JARPA

Stock structure of Antarctic minke whales Biological parameters of Antarctic minke whales Role of whales in the Antarctic marine ecosystem Effects of environmental change on cetaceans Whaling Trends IWC Gridlock

• ¾ of countries needed to overturn moratorium

• Original 14 whaling nations now 88

• Some join (are sponsored?) specifically to halt whaling… others to vote for whaling

• Resumption of whaling rejected every year

• Japan, Iceland, Norway: “we’ll leave” Unblocking IWC

The Irish proposal (1997)

Global sanctuary for whales outside national EEZs

Coastal commercial whaling within EEZs under IWC RMS

Ban on international trade in whale products

Phase-out of scientific whaling Drowned in the Political Noise 2005: Expand Scientific Whaling

Whaling divisions deepen as Japan pushes for credibility Cyranoski, D. 2005. Nature 435: 861.

Japan’s proposal to double its scientific permit take Formal approval not needed to pursue the scientific sampling 2006: Critique of Scientific Whaling

Corkeron, P.J. 2009. Reconsidering the science of scientific whaling. Marine Ecology Progress Series 375: 305–309.

 Summary of December 2006 review of Japanese whaling under special permit in the Antarctic (JARPA) program:

• Objective: to estimate biological parameters , especially natural mortality, of Antarctic minke whales Balaenoptera bonaerensis. • Approach: Collected biological data on 6778 minke whales lethally sampled over 18 years. • Outcomes: The natural mortality rate had not been determined. In particular, even a zero value was not excluded by the analysis. 2006: Critique of Scientific Whaling

Corkeron, P.J. 2009. Reconsidering the science of scientific whaling. Marine Ecology Progress Series 375: 305–309.

 Review of Feasibility study in North Pacific (JARPN II): • Goal: Understand the role of whales in the marine ecosystem. • Approach: Design of this study—forestomach sampling coupled with acoustic and trawl surveys for prey—is an unsophisticated approach to investigating the foraging ecology of Balaenoptera spp. • Outcomes: Published results demonstrate problems with the execution of field work, and simplistic data analyses. 2010: Moratorium Suspension

Deal to Legalize Whaling Would Sideline Science Morrell, V. 2010. Science 328: 557.

In a bid to tighten the IWC’s grip on its members’ whaling and reduce the number of whales killed, IWC Chair (of Chile) proposed a controversial deal.

In exchange for narrowing loopholes, Japan, Norway, and Iceland would be allowed To commercially hunt whales for 10 years. 2010: Moratorium Suspension

Call for Science to Clear Whaling Confusion Justin Cooke, Sidney Holt, Russell Leaper, Vassili Papastavrou. Science 18 June 2010: 1481.

NEGOTIATIONS ON THE FUTURE OF THE IWC may culminate in a decision at the annual meeting in Morocco from 21 to 25 June that would suspend the current moratorium on commercial whaling and allow commercial catches of ﬁn, minke, sei, and Bryde’s whales in the North Atlantic, Southern Ocean, and North Paciﬁc. Proposals from the Chair for a consensus decision to allocate ad hoc catch quotas close to current levels of whaling for a 10-year period have been criticized for side lining science (“Deal to legalize whaling would sideline science,” V. Morell, 2010). Call for Science to Clear Whaling Confusion Justin Cooke, Sidney Holt, Russell Leaper, Vassili Papastavrou. Science 18 June 2010: 1481.

In response, a press release issued 7 May expressed the intention that catches would be within limits calculated according to the IWC’s agreed, science-based, and “extremely conservative” Revised Management Procedure (RMP). Unfortunately, this intent is not reflected in the wording of the actual proposal, which allows sufficient room for interpretation to potentially allow much higher catches than would be considered sustainable in the long term according to the agreed and published specification of the RMP.

This confusion can only be resolved by explicit adoption of the published procedure into the IWC Schedule and instructions to the IWC Scientific Committee to perform the relevant calculations. Call for Science to Clear Whaling Confusion Justin Cooke, Sidney Holt, Russell Leaper, Vassili Papastavrou. Science 18 June 2010: 1481.

This confusion can only be resolved by explicit adoption of the published procedure into the IWC Schedule and instructions to the IWC Scientific Committee to perform the relevant calculations. Calculations of sustainable catch levels using the procedure and performed by the Scientific Committee, which includes scientists nominated by both whaling and non-whaling governments in addition to a number of independent experts, would be transparent, documented, and veriﬁable.

Without such advice from the Scientiﬁc Committee, many of the 88 member nations of the IWC will not have the scientiﬁc resources themselves to assess the validity of the proposed catches amid the inevitable claims and counterclaims that are being made. 2015: Expansion of Scientific Whaling

Scientists renew objections to Japan’s whaling program. Normile D. 2015. Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.aac6872

For the third time in 15 months, experts have concluded there is no justification for Japan to kill whales for research purposes. But the country's lethal scientific whaling effort seems poised to resume with the 2015-16 Southern Ocean hunting season anyway.

In the report, 44 scientists from 18 of the 33 countries attending the session on Japan's research whaling program wrote: “the need for lethal sampling has not been demonstrated.”

An IWC statement stated that: “It was not possible for the Scientific Committee to reach a consensus view of the overall program.” 2015: Expansion of Scientific Whaling

Scientists renew objections to Japan’s whaling program. Normile D. 2015. Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.aac6872

In 2014-15 Antarctic season, Japan complied and conducted only nonlethal sampling. But it also drew up a New Research Program in Antarctic Ocean (NEWREP-A) that will take 333 minke whales a year for the next 12 years in addition to other nonlethal research.

The IWC scientific committee took up NEWREP-A, with some additional analyses provided by the Japanese, and the panel's report during its annual meeting held in San Diego, 19 May to 3 June.

Japan, an IWC member, contends that the scientific committee has no legal basis to approve or reject a research plan. December 2018: Japan Leaving the IWC The Confrontation Continues Socio-Cultural (and Economic) Drivers Moral vs. Ecological (Morishita 2006) Nationalisms

Cultural Identities

Fish Stock Depletion (Clapham et al. 2007) (Robards & Reeves 2011)

(Costello & Baker 2011) Ecosystem-based Whaling

www.icrwhale.org Whaling for the Ecosystem (and Fisheries) Whaling for the Ecosystem (and Fisheries)

(Gerber et al. 2009) Lessons from Whaling

• New technology allows increased harvesting and discovery of new resources • This often leads to overharvesting and a pattern of sequential depletion • More valuable (generally bigger) species are caught (and depleted) first • In fisheries, this phenomenon is commonly known as sequential depletion because more profitable (often the higher trophic level species) are caught first Lessons from IWC

• Open-ocean fisheries need effective international management • To keep control, governments require consensus, super-majority votes and built-in loopholes • Results in delayed or ineffective decision-making • Decisions often ignore scientific advice for politics Principles of Effective Management

1. Recognize human motivation of self-interest 2. Act before scientific consensus is achieved 3. Rely on scientists to recognize but not remedy problems 4. Distrust claims of sustainability 5. Confront uncertainty

(Ludwig et al. 1993)