Perspective from Japan on whaling and whale meat, a spot of gourmet news, and monthly updates of whale meat stockpile statistics
New Zealand scientists have over the years contributed little constructive information with regards to the ICRW's requirements that signatories promote research to enhance understanding of whale stocks, with the aim of making possible the "orderly development of the whaling industry".
Scott Baker of Auckland University is one such "scientist". Funded by the International Fund for Animal Welfare
(IFAW), an "environmental" group that draws millions of dollars in anti-whaling donation, Baker claims that
"Humpback whales throughout much of the South Pacific have shown little sign of recovery to their former abundance, despite claims to the contrary by some Japanese scientists."
This is despite "Dr" Baker's fellow researchers in Australia having recognised that the Humpback population in the region is "booming"
He also attempts to make out that:"Japan plans to resume hunting of both species in defiance of the 1986 moratorium on commercial whaling and the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary”
"Dr" Baker is certainly in a position to be aware of the provisions of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, which explicitly allow lethal hunts for scientific purposes. To talk of "defiance" is a nonsense - Article VIII existed since the beginning.
He also adds that “Japan's irresponsible plans to hunt these same whales during their migration to feeding grounds in waters around the Antarctic could undermine local recovery."
"Dr" Baker should do his maths. The numbers of whales Japan is proposing to take is well within the 10% annual rate of population growth
that Australian researchers have observed. So just how are these plans "irresponsible", and how could they "undermine local recovery" to a degree worth worrying about?
That "Dr" Baker is prepared to have such comments attributed to his name makes it clear that he is nothing but a mouthpiece for the IFAW, who in part fund his livelihood. His comments could easily have been taken directly from the IFAW's homepage
If "Dr" Baker wants to be taken seriously, he should stick to his science, rather than wade into the political side of the debate. Of course, if he did that the IFAW might not feel so inclined to fund him any longer... everyone has to make a living for themselves somehow though, don't they :-)