DOCSLIB.ORG

Iceland's Whaling Comeback

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Iceland's Whaling Comeback Iceland’s Whaling Comeback: Preparations for the Resumption of Whaling from a humpback whale that was reported entan- 4.3. Contamination of Whale Meat 37 gled in a fishing net in June 2002 . However, ac- The contamination of whale meat with toxic chemi- cording to radio news Hagkaup halted sale shortly cals including heavy metals has drawn the attention afterwards, presumably because the meat had not of the public in several nations and the concern of been checked by the veterinary inspection. the IWC. For example, ten years of clinical trials of almost 1,000 children in the Faroe Islands have An unknown number of small cetaceans, mainly directly associated neurobehavioral dysfunction with harbour porpoises and white-beaked dolphins, are their mothers’ consumption of pilot whale meat killed in fishing nets. Regular entanglements of contaminated with high levels of mercury. Concerns harbour porpoises are reported from the inshore have also been expressed about the health impacts 38 spring fishery for lumpfish . One single fisherman of high levels of organic compounds including PCBs reported about 12 harbour porpoises being entan- in whale tissue. As a consequence, the Faroese gled in his nets and he considered this number to be government recommended to consumers that they comparatively low. reduce or stop consumption of whale products41. While the meat is often used for human consump- Furthermore, studies by Norwegian scientists and tion, the blubber of small cetaceans is also used as the Fisheries Directorate revealed that blubber from 39 bait for shark fishing . According to newspaper North Atlantic minke whales contains serious levels reports, small cetaceans killed intentionally are of PCBs and dioxin42, 43. Upon this alarming news regularly declared as bycatch and the meat sold at from Norway, the Japanese government refused to fish auctions. Sport hunting also takes place – import Norwegian minke whale meat and blubber in sometimes even before the eyes of whale watching 2001, complying with warnings of Japanese con- tourists, causing understandable anger. Sport hunt- sumer organisations. ers recently indicated their interest in intensifying 33 hunting of small cetaceans . Because Iceland was present and invited to partici- pate as an observer at the 2001 IWC Meeting, it 4.2. New IWC Membership – New Reporting would have been fully aware of this problem, as the Responsibilities IWC adopted Resolution IWC/53/5, which ex- presses concern regarding the high level of con- As a new IWC member Iceland is now bound by the taminants in blubber from minke whales taken in the requirement in Article IX of the ICRW to „take ap- Norwegian hunt. In this resolution Norway is re- propriate measures to implement the Convention, quested not to issue export permits. Nevertheless, including measures for prosecuting infractions“. It in 2002 both Norway and Iceland gave a green light will also be expected to comply with a number of for trade in exactly this whale blubber, and at least IWC resolutions that seek information on sale of 25 tonnes have been imported by Iceland in two whale products, stockpiles, fisheries bycatch etc. separate shipments. The imported whale products (Resolutions IWC/46/7; IWC/47/6; IWC/48/3). were offered in the stores of the supermarket chain Noatun in southwest Iceland44. However, it is doubtful that Iceland can or will com- ply with these provisions. Despite the fact that it The Icelandic Ministry of Environment responded to supported IWC Resolution IWC/42/26/Rev1 in 1990, a letter of concern about this import from WDCS in which recommends that parties should provide early 2003. The official stated that “there were some information on directed and incidental takes of small suspicions about the imported whale meat did not cetaceans, Iceland did not contribute such data. fulfil Icelandic regulations on the matter” and noting Official data on Icelandic by-catch do not exist, that the blubber was tested. Although PCB levels although the reporting of marine mammal by- were reportedly “under allowed limitations in the catches in logbooks of fisheries has been manda- 40 Icelandic legislation”, the letter does not mention tory in Iceland for several years . If at all, only other toxic organic compounds that would be ex- fragmented information, mainly based on newspa- pected to be found in the tissue. per reports, are available. Furthermore, the letter does not specify whether the It remains to be seen whether Iceland duly reports “hvalrengi” (the fat rich ventral grooves) reported to the bycatch of the humpback whale in June 2002 have been imported27 were tested. Because fat is and other incidents from 2002 to the Infractions the main tissue which stores PCBs and other or- Sub-Committee at the IWC meeting in June 2003. ganic compounds, the consumption of “hvalrengi” gives just as much reason for concern as blubber. 41 Diet Recommendations concerning pilot whale meat and blub- ber – Faroe Islands August 1998. 37 th Morgunbladid (2002), 13 June 42 38 Kleivane & Skaare (1998): “Organochlorine contaminants in Lindquist, O. (1998): "Whales, their environment and history", Northeas Atlantic minke whales”, Environm. Poll. 101, 231-239. Reykjavik. 43 st Reuters (2002): news dated 1 August, 39 th Morgunbladid (1997), 14 April www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/17122/ story.htm 40 44 Ólafsdóttir, in NAMMCO (2001): “Annual Report 2001”, Tromso, Middleton, R. (2002): “Whale meat on sale at Icelandic Super- Norway. market Chain”, AP News 23rd July. - 9 - Iceland’s Whaling Comeback: Preparations for the Resumption of Whaling 49 Figure 7: Whale catchers Hvalur 6-9, Reykjavik officially registered . Only Hvalur 8 and Hvalur 9 were engaged in the research whaling from 1986 to 198950. The other two, Hvalur 6 and Hvalur 7, were sunk by a radical conservationist group in 1986. Although refloated, they were not employed before “scientific whaling” ended 1989. All four vessels currently lie at anchor in the harbour of Reykjavik (figure 7), and are ready to resume whaling51. Besides the four large whale catchers (figure 7), most of the small fishing vessels, which until 1985 hunted minke whales (figure 8), are probably still operational. 5. Iceland’s Whaling Fleet 5.1. Whaling Equipment For compelling welfare reasons, the IWC completely There are two sides to Iceland’s historical whaling banned the use of the cold (non-explosive) harpoon activities: One fleet targeted large cetaceans (such in commercial minke whaling from the beginning of as blue, fin, sei and humpback whales) using spe- the 1982/83 pelagic and the 1983 coastal seasons cially-built whale catchers, equipped with large- (paragraph 6, section III of the Schedule). Iceland calibre explosive harpoons and strong engines. The lodged a reservation to this provision, but this other used small fishing vessels, equipped only with lapsed upon its departure from the Commission in cold harpoons (figure 1), to catch minke whales. Figure 8: Minke whaling vessels, North Iceland Since 1948 the large whaling operations have been in the hands of a single company, Hvalur H/F. (Whale Ltd.), which is owned by an influential mem- ber of the conservative Independence Party45. Thanks presumably to excellent political connec- tions, this single enterprise secured exclusive con- tracts from the Government to hunt whales under the Icelandic research programme of 1986 to 1989. According to the Ministry of Fisheries9, the whaling company Hvalur H/F “has never needed govern- mental subsidies”. This is hardly surprising in light of the considerable commercial profits it appeared to make. 1992 and it did not lodge a new objection when it Officially, the Marine Research Institute promised rejoined in 2002. Furthermore, IWC Resolution that “all profits made by the whaling operation will IWC/38/28 recommends that also under research enter a research fund to cover all costs of the re- permits “whales will be killed in a manner consistent search activities” and announced “very drastic with the provisions of Section III in the Schedule”. 46, 47 measures on the industry” to ensure this . In reality, however, only 10% of the total income from Iceland’s smaller fishing vessels only carry cold the 1986 “scientific whaling” season had been paid harpoons. If Iceland uses these vessels in any fu- towards the research programme, while almost ture commercially motivated whaling operation, they 90%, with a value of more than 4,6 million US Dol- 48 will need to be equipped with, and their crew trained lar, remained within Hvalur H/F . Japanese workers to use, explosive harpoons to avoid committing an controlled the processing at the Hvalur H/F whaling infraction of Schedule Paragraph 6. station and selected whale meat for exports to Ja- 11 pan . Although data from other years are not avail- able, the research whaling of 1986 to 1989 was clearly for commercial purposes. 6. Whale Watching Versus In 1985, four Hvalur H/F owned whale catchers Whaling (Hvalur 6 to 9) and nine minke whaling vessels were About 15 different species of cetaceans can be observed in Icelandic waters during the summer months, making it one of the best areas for whale 45 watching in the world. Iceland’s whale watching Brydon, A. (1990): “Icelandic nationalism and the Whaling industry has developed rapidly since the first 100 Issue”, Dept. of Anthropology, Mc Gill Univ., Montreal, Canada. 46 Marine Research Institute (1985): “Introductory meeting on 49 whale research in Iceland and plans for intensified re-search in the IWC (1985): “International register of whaling vessels”, Sixth period 1986 - 1989”, 16th August, Reykjavik. Edition, La Carter, Washington. 47 50 Sigurjónsson, J. (1988): “The intensified programme of whale Ministry of Fisheries, Iceland (1990): “A report to the technical research in Iceland”, Modern Iceland, No. 4, 29-33. Committee’s working group on socio-economic implications and 48 small-type whaling”, tabled as document TC/42/SEST6 Reeve, R.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Bowhead Vs. the Gray Whale in Chukotkan Aboriginal Whaling IGOR I
    ARCTIC VOL. 40, NO. 1 (MARCH 1987) P. 16-32 The Bowhead vs. the Gray Whale in Chukotkan Aboriginal Whaling IGOR I. KRUPNIK’ (Received 5 September 1984; accepted in revised form 22 July 1986) ABSTRACT. Active whaling for large baleen whales -mostly for bowhead (Balaena mysricetus) and gray whales (Eschrichrius robustus)-has been practiced by aborigines on the Chukotka Peninsula since at least the early centuries of the Christian era. Thehistory of native whaling off Chukotka may be divided into four periods according to the hunting methods used and the primary species pursued: ancient or aboriginal (from earliest times up to the second half of the 19th century); rraditional (second half of the 19th century to the1930s); transitional (late 1930s toearly 1960s); and modern (from the early 1960s). The data on bowhead/gray whale bone distribution in theruins of aboriginal coastal sites, available catch data from native settlements from the late 19th century and local oral tradition prove to be valuable sources for identifying specific areas of aboriginal whaling off Chukotka. Until the 1930s, bowhead whales generally predominated in the native catch; gray whales were hunted periodically or locally along restricted parts of the coast. Some 8-10 bowheads and 3-5 gray whales were killed on the average in a “good year”by Chukotka natives during the early 20th century. Around the mid-20th century, however, bowheads were completely replaced by gray whales. On the basis of this experience, the author believes that the substitution of gray whales for bowheads, proposed recently by conservationists for modemAlaska Eskimos, would be unsuccessful.
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Whaling
    This PDF is a selection from an out-of-print volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: In Pursuit of Leviathan: Technology, Institutions, Productivity, and Profits in American Whaling, 1816-1906 Volume Author/Editor: Lance E. Davis, Robert E. Gallman, and Karin Gleiter Volume Publisher: University of Chicago Press Volume ISBN: 0-226-13789-9 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/davi97-1 Publication Date: January 1997 Chapter Title: Modern Whaling Chapter Author: Lance E. Davis, Robert E. Gallman, Karin Gleiter Chapter URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c8288 Chapter pages in book: (p. 498 - 512) 13 Modern Whaling The last three decades of the nineteenth century were a period of decline for American whaling.' The market for oil was weak because of the advance of petroleum production, and only the demand for bone kept right whalers and bowhead whalers afloat. It was against this background that the Norwegian whaling industry emerged and grew to formidable size. Oddly enough, the Norwegians were not after bone-the whales they hunted, although baleens, yielded bone of very poor quality. They were after oil, and oil of an inferior sort. How was it that the Norwegians could prosper, selling inferior oil in a declining market? The answer is that their costs were exceedingly low. The whales they hunted existed in profusion along the northern (Finnmark) coast of Norway and could be caught with a relatively modest commitment of man and vessel time. The area from which the hunters came was poor. Labor was cheap; it also happened to be experienced in maritime pursuits, particularly in the sealing industry and in hunting small whales-the bottlenose whale and the white whale (narwhal).
    [Show full text]
  • North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission
    North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission ANNUAL REPORT 1995 Layout & editing: NAMMCO Secretariat Printing: Peder Norbye Grafisk, Tromsø, Norway ISSN 1025-2045 ISBN 82-91578-00-1 © North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission 1995 Søndre Tollbugate 9, Postal address: University of Tromsø, 9037 Tromsø Tel.: +47 77 64 59 08, Fax: +47 77 64 59 05, Email: [email protected] Preface The North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission was established in 1992 by an Agreement signed in Nuuk, Greenland on the 9th of April between the Faroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland and Norway. The objective of the Commission, as stated in the Agreement, is to “... contribute through regional consultation and cooperation, to the conservation, rational management and study of marine mammals in the North Atlantic.” The Council, which is the decision-making body of the Commission, held its inaugural meeting in Tórshavn, Faroe Islands, 10-11 September 1992 (NAMMCO/1), and has convened four times since: in Tromsø, Norway 19-20 January 1993 (NAMMCO/2); Reykjavik, Iceland, 1-2 July 1993 (NAMMCO/3); Tromsø, Norway 24-25 February 1994 (NAMMCO/4); and most recently in Nuuk, Greenland, 21-23 February 1995 (NAMMCO/5). The present volume contains proceedings from NAMMCO/5 - the fifth meeting of the Council, which was held at the Hotel Hans Egede in Nuuk, Greenland 21-23 February 1995 (Section 1), as well as the reports of the 1995 meetings of the Management Committee (Section 2) and the Scientific Committee (Section 3), which presented their conclusions to the Council at its fifth meeting. Included as an annex to the Management Committee report is the report of the second meeting of the Working Group on Inspection and Observation.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Bulletin No. 6. a History of California Shore Whaling
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMMISSION FISH BULLETIN No. 6 A History of California Shore Whaling BY EDWIN C. STARKS Stanford University 1923 1 2 3 4 1. A History of California Shore Whaling By EDWIN C. STARKS, Stanford University. It was once suggested to me that as there were still living a few of the men who took part in the old shore whaling operations on our coast it would be a desirable piece of work to get, by personal interview, a history of whaling at Monterey Bay. This I started to do, but with an accumulation of whaling data my interest led me to write a history of the shore whaling of the whole California coast, with an account of whales and whaling operations past and present. Though what material I have obtained from old whalemen has been of great value, I have found it impossible to get reliable dates from them. Hence this account, rather than an original contribution, may better be looked upon as a compilation of records found in old newspapers, books of travel, fish commission reports, notes and clippings in the Bancroft Library, and in such-like sources of information.1 Although we have known a certain amount about the whales of the north Pacific for a great many years, there is no group of animals of which we really know less, particularly as regards kinds or species. This is easily understandable when we consider the fact that we can not collect whales, as we do other animals, take them into the laboratory and placing them side by side make direct comparisons.
    [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]
  • Norwegian Bay Whaling Station
    Norwegian Bay Whaling Station An Archaeolo~icaI Ueport --- 1 S.Oickhart by Myra Stanbury /(j:-P()/2; - Dept. Maritime Archaeology Western Australian Museum 1983 No. :u - NORWEGIAN BAY WHALING STATION AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT Myra Stanbury, Assistant Curator, Dept. Maritime Archaeology, W. A. Maritime Museum, Cliff Street, FREMANTLE, W. A. 6160 • Front cover: Sketch of Oil Storage Tanks S . J. Dickhart. CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements ii List of Figures iii Map References vi Introduction 1 Historical Background 1 Site Location and Access 8 Site Description and Survey 14 Findings 19 (a) Oil Storage Tanks and Environs 19 (b) Central area: workshops 25 (c) Southern area: residential 29 (d) Western area: jetties, slipways, flensing deck etc. 35 Summary and Conclusions 45 Appendix 1 Specifications of Whale Catching Steamers 46 Appendix 2. Liquidator's List of Equipment 47 Appendix 3 Whale Catches at Norwegian Bay 1913-1955 54 Appendix 4 Statement of Whaling Operations Carried out at Point Cloates Western Australia by the Norwegian Bay Whaling Company 55 Appendix 5 : Copy of Agreement with the Australian Workers' Union 56 Bibliography 62 i ACKNOIVLEDGEMENTS The author would like to express her thanks to Jon Carpenter (IV.A. Museum), Milton Clark, Syd Dickhart (M.A.A.W.A.), Peter Gesner (Maritime Archaeology Diploma Course) and Zoe Inman, for their assistance with the field survey and recording of field data; to Mr. & IVIrs Edgar Lefroy and Jane Lefroy of Ningaloo Station, for the use of their shearing premises and general historical information; to Graeme Henderson (Curator of Maritime Archaeology) and staff of the Maritime Archaeology Department for ad vice and photographic assistance, to the following persons who have kindly provided I?hotog-raphs, maps and information relating to the early whaling operations at Norwegian Bay, and have assisted in the identification of the various structures and artefacts: Les Coleman and Bill Stephens (formerly of Nor' West Whaling Co.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief History of Pacific Coast Whaling
    19005 Coast Highway One, Jenner, CA 95450 ■ 707.847.3437 ■ [email protected] ■ www.fortross.org Title: A Brief History of Pacific Coast Whaling Author (s): Nicholas J. Lee Source: Fort Ross Conservancy Library URL: http://www.fortross.org/lib.html Unless otherwise noted in the manuscript, each author maintains copyright of his or her written material. Fort Ross Conservancy (FRC) asks that you acknowledge FRC as the distributor of the content; if you use material from FRC’s online library, we request that you link directly to the URL provided. If you use the content offline, we ask that you credit the source as follows: “Digital content courtesy of Fort Ross Conservancy, www.fortross.org; author maintains copyright of his or her written material.” Also please consider becoming a member of Fort Ross Conservancy to ensure our work of promoting and protecting Fort Ross continues: http://www.fortross.org/join.htm. This online repository, funded by Renova Fort Ross Foundation, is brought to you by Fort Ross Conservancy, a 501(c)(3) and California State Park cooperating association. FRC’s mission is to connect people to the history and beauty of Fort Ross and Salt Point State Parks. - ) y / ,. ; / / / ' • Fo rt Ross Interpretive Assn . Library 1UCHOLA3 J. r.r.:s 19005 Coast Highway "'? jU' r '·ri.;_t· x· 7 (· ·1 \1 Jenner, CA 95450 · ·~ EL (HlldADA~ C,.\.L!F., 94018. A BHI 2:F HISTORY OP' P!lCI:FIC ~OAS'l' ~...:1-?ALTI!G B,y Nicholas J. Lse ~~11ala!:> wn:re ca1;.ght. b,;r t~~ Indir..ns of the Pacific North · )~ast, ;J.till~ing sps cial 35 foot c~no•1 ~, hH:r-poons, lines And fJ.oats, ev~m by poi~cn.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Change and Local Foodways in the Faroe Islands, A
    Environmental Change and Local Foodways in the Faroe Islands, a North Atlantic Artisanal Whaling Society Russell Fielding, Department of Geography and Anthropology, Louisiana State University; USA Abstract In the short term, the direct effects of global warming upon artisanal whaling in the Faroe Islands may be negligible. However, other environmental changes now underway—some of which share causal elements with global warming—show signs of having immediate and possibly terminal effects on this traditional cultural practice. These same environmental changes are likely to have similar effects on other artisanal and aboriginal whaling activities throughout the circumpolar North. The Faroese pilot whale harvest—known locally as the grindadráp—is currently being threatened by the increase of industrial and agricultural pollutants found in the tissues of pilot whales. The consumption of pilot whale meat and blubber that is high in these pollutants has been shown to contribute to a variety of health problems. In 1998 the Chief Medical Officer of the Faroe Islands recommended that pregnant women no longer consume pilot whale meat or blubber and that everyone limit their consumption. Now, ten years later, this fall will likely see the new recommendation that no one should eat any pilot whale meat or blubber at all. Because the only practical purpose of the grindadráp is food production, it would seem that the new recommendation also suggests terminating this longstanding and traditional method of Faroese food production. This paper will briefly discuss the history of the grindadráp in the context of its broader human-environmental interactions. It then describes the various threats to the grindadráp’s continuance over the years, including the pollution problem and the research that has been done into its health effects.
    [Show full text]
  • A Collection of Kinship
    A Collection of Kinship Ethnographic drawing in Shetland Bérénice Carrington A Collection Of Kinship A gentle suite of subjective works mainly in watercolour and pencil, the results of a winter’s residency at the Owld Haa* on the island of Yell, Shetland. The pieces were conceived between September 2015 and March 2016. Most were produced in situ at the museum, but some came also from memory and photographs. They were exhibited at the Owld Haa Gallery during September and October 2016. Cover: Left - Detail: Ripper, flensing knife and Magellan Daisy Right - Detail: Gibbie Hoseason’s Penguins, photographer: B Carrington Portrait of carved penguin, 2015, 76 x 56 cm Within its collection, either under the provenance of these objects containing the bobbed hair of a glass, in cabinets or propped by contrasting them against young woman from circa 1920. up in the corner of a room the kindred articles from my personal Owld Haa displays whales’ teeth, background: a carved penguin a hair watch chain and a flensing from whaling days, a 1913 bayonet Whale’s teeth, Sooth* Georgia: blade. The drawings explore and sheath and a paper bag Leith, 2016, 46 x 51 cm Although they appear to be simple seemingly self-evident; beneath its basis in the prosaic, a Forget- compositions, the drawings are their commonplace purpose and me-not (Myosotis) drawn on the necessarily highly detailed and meaning there may lie another same plane as a hair watch chain arranged to set up a pictorial perspective. The inclusion of presents a pair of objects symbolic notion of the provenance of local flowers and mosses in some of enduring affection or love.
    [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]
  • Lexical Semantics As a Tool for Developing Critical Reading in the Language Classroom
    Lexical Semantics as a Tool for Developing Critical Reading in the Language Classroom Semántica léxica como herramienta para desarrollar lectura crítica en el salón de clase Alexandra Isabel GARCÍA MARRUGO Universidad del Norte (Barranquilla, Colombia) Abstract This paper illustrates how a detailed analysis of lexical choices can evince the author’s ideological message in seemingly expository texts. The activity described, part of the content- based course English V: Technology, Environment, and Progress in the International Relations Program at the Universidad del Norte, leads students to the realization of their tendency to accept every written text as an objective depiction of reality without questioning the writer’s purpose or intentions. Furthermore, the comparison of two texts dealing with the same topic but written from opposing points of view helps the students understand how language can be manipulated for particular purposes. Key Words: lexical analysis; collocation; lexical semantics; reading strategies. Resumen Este ensayo ilustra la manera en que un análisis detallado de las selecciones léxicas puede manifestar el mensaje ideológico del autor en textos aparentemente explicativos. La actividad expuesta, componente del curso basado en contenidos Inglés V: Tecnología, Ambiente y Progreso del Programa de Relaciones Internacionales de la Universidad del Norte, lleva a los estudiantes a una comprensión de su tendencia a aceptar todo texto escrito como una representación objetiva de la realidad sin cuestionar el propósito o las intenciones de quien lo escribió. Además, la comparación de dos textos que tratan el mismo tema pero que se han escrito tomando puntos de vista opuestos ayuda al estudiante a entender cómo la lengua se puede manipular con propósitos particulares.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Mammal Protection and Management: a Case Study
    Bioethics@ Marine Mammal Protection and Management: A Case Study By: Dr. D. J. Orth, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Participant in the 1996 MSU Bioethics Institute Relevant Facts about Marine Mammals Biologically, marine mammals are those members of the Class Mammalia that are morphologically adapted to life in the ocean. They include three taxonomic Orders, the Cetacea (whales and porpoises), Pinnipedia (seals, walruses and sea lions), and Sirenia (manatees and dugongs). Other groups (sea otters and polar bears) are considered marine mammals in US legislation. Many coastal cultures hunted whales and thrived on the meat, skins, and other products of whales, seals, and polar bears. Threats to these creatures have been well publicized. Some whales were hunted to near-extinction, porpoises were killed during purse netting for Pacific tuna, contaminated sea lions aborted young, Northern fur seals were overharvested, and manatees were injured from motorboat collisions. The Marine Mammal Protection Act, passed by the U.S. in 1972, is the most comprehensive protective mechanism for marine mammals. It established a moratorium on hunting, capturing, or killing marine mammals in U.S. waters and by U.S. citizens on the high seas and on importing marine mammals and marine mammal products into the U.S. The MMPA also directs that commercial fishing operations reduce incidental kill or serious injury to marine mammals. Taking of marine mammals is permitted only after scientists determine that a population is at or above the Optimum Sustainable Population (OSP) level. Additionally, the U.S. Endangered Species Act (1973) protects 16 marine mammals (as of Aug. 1996) threatened with extinction.
    [Show full text]