 | ||
 | ||
 | ||
 |
 |
プレスリリース |
|
最近開催された会議 | |
|
これから開催される会議予定 | |
|
関連ニュース | |
 | ||
 | ||
 | ||
 | ||
 | ||
 | ||
  | ||
関連ニュース  行方不明者の発見について (共同船舶(株)プレスリリース 2007年2月17日）
Eleventh Meeting of the NAMMCO Council (NAMMCOプレスリリース 2002年2月7日）
GREENPEACE ANTARCTIC CAMPAIGN A FAILURE (水産庁プレスリリース 2002年1月16日）
Australian Parliamentary Secretary "Misinformed" (水産庁プレスリリース 2002年1月9日）
"Why doesn't Greenpeace tell the truth?" Evening Post ; 2nd January 2002 (新聞記事）
| |
|
Eleventh Meeting of the NAMMCO Council
February 7, 2002
The North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO) celebrated its 10th anniversary in Ilulissat during the 11th meeting of the NAMMCO Council 5 - 7 February 2002.
The meeting was attended by delegations from the member countries, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, Iceland and Norway, as well as observers from the Governments of Canada, Denmark, Japan and the Russian Federation.
A number of inter-governmental and non-governmental organisations also attended the meeting. Hans Enoksen, the Minister of Fisheries, Hunting and Settlements of Greenland, opened the meeting with his reflections on the importance of sustainable utilisation of marine mammals in Greenland, and on the importance of NAMMCO.
The Minister also focused on the future of NAMMCO, describing the organisation as having successfully passed its first ten years and now being ready for even larger obligations and challenges.
The Minister's welcome address touched upon areas that were central to this year's meeting.
In taking stock of the decade that has passed, the NAMMCO Council noted with satisfaction that much had been achieved during that time.
The organisation has gained international recognition, the Observation and Inspection Scheme is fully functional, the organisation has a solid scientific foundation and the Scientific Committee has thoroughly assessed key species and stocks, hunting methods have been addressed in two successful workshops, and two important international conferences have been held during the past ten years.
Management advice has been provided to member countries on many North Atlantic stocks of whales and seals.
Work on quantifying the interactions between marine mammals and fisheries is at the forefront of the NAMMCO Scientific Committee's agenda, and is part of the larger goal of NAMMCO to apply an ecosystem approach to the study and management of marine mammals.
West Greenland Beluga and Narwhal
A working group of the NAMMCO Scientific Committee held a joint meeting with the Canada/Greenland Joint Commission on Conservation and Management of Narwhal and Beluga (JCNB) in May 2001, to evaluate the population status of West Greenland beluga and narwhal.
Greenlandic and Canadian hunters participated in the meeting.
For beluga, similar conclusions were reached as in 2000, that the West Greenland beluga stock is substantially depleted and that present harvesting levels are not sustainable.
The Scientific Committee provided several harvest options for the stock, with projected population trends for each option.
This advice is used by the JCNB in providing their management recommendations to Canada and Greenland.
With regard to narwhal, sufficient information on abundance and stock delineation was not available to allow a full assessment at this time.
However it is anticipated that new information will be available which will enable such an assessment in 2003.
Because the assessment of West Greenland beluga has been completed, the Council instructed the Scientific Committee to concentrate its assessment efforts on narwhal in the near term.
Greenland informed the Management Committee that in November 2000 the Government made a decision in principle to introduce harvest quotas for beluga and narwhal.
The Management Committee welcomed this information and commended Greenland for taking action on this difficult issue.
The Management Committee also expressed satisfaction with the continued scientific co-operation with the JCNB, which was found to be productive for both parties.
West Greenland Walrus
In 1995 the Management Committee recommended that Greenland take appropriate steps to arrest the decline of walrus along its west coast, and encouraged Canada to consider working co-operatively with Greenland to assist in achieving this objective.
Greenland informed the Committee that a decision in principle had been made to introduce quotas on walrus.
North Atlantic Sightings Surveys (NASS)
The NAMMCO Scientific Committee co-ordinated the NASS-2001 survey, which covered much of the Central and Northeast Atlantic, with participation from the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Norway.
Target species for the survey were minke and fin whales, but all species encountered were recorded.
Abundance estimates for target and other species are presently being calculated by the Scientific Committee.
The Council noted that Faroese and Norwegian research vessels, which had planned to include waters around the United Kingdom in their survey, were denied access to this area at the last moment.
The Council deplored this decision of the United Kingdom, which was counterproductive to the conservation and effective management of cetaceans in the area.
Humpback Whales
There are indications from the NASS surveys that the stock of humpback whales around Iceland has increased rapidly over the past 15 years.
The Council therefore requested the Scientific Committee to complete abundance estimates for this species as a high priority.
Marine Mammal - Fisheries Interactions
The Council stressed the importance of continued work on marine mammal - fisheries interactions and noted that this will continue to be a high priority for NAMMCO.
In 2001 the Scientific Committee held a workshop to investigate the methodological and analytical problems in estimating consumption by marine mammals.
This resulted in concrete recommendations and research priorities to improve consumption estimates for minke whales and harp and hooded seals in the North Atlantic.
Much work remains to be done, however, and the Council endorsed the Scientific Committee's plan to hold a further workshop on ecosystem models, aiming for a better understanding of the ecological role of minke whales and harp and hooded seals in the North Atlantic.
Japan's whale research programs are providing valuable scientific information related to interactions between cetaceans and fisheries.
The Council expressed its continued support for this research noting that it compliments the work of the NAMMCO Scientific Committee to develop multi-species models.
Collection of Data on Marine Mammal Bycatch
The Management Committee endorsed and encouraged the efforts of member countries to establish data collection systems to collect information on marine mammal bycatch.
Subsequent to last year's decision to initiate a reporting system for marine mammal bycatch to NAMMCO, 2001 marked the first year when such data was reported to NAMMCO.
International Observation of Whaling and Sealing
Observations under the NAMMCO International Observation Scheme were conducted on sealing and whaling activities in Norway, pilot whaling in the Faroes and whaling in Greenland.
The observations were carried out by international observers appointed by NAMMCO.
Workshop on Weapons, Ammunition and Ballistics
In November 2001 NAMMCO hosted a workshop on weapons, ammunition and ballistics in marine mammal hunting in Sandefjord, Norway, with participation from NAMMCO member countries as well as Canada and Sweden.
The main objectives of the workshop were to increase the understanding of weapon types, ammunition and ballistics for hunters and others, and to develop guidelines for weapons and ammunition types used for different species.
The report of the workshop provides an excellent reference for choosing the best weapons and ammunition for the effective and humane hunting of marine mammals.
Conference on User Knowledge and Scientific Knowledge in Management Decision Making
The Council endorsed a plan to hold an international conference on integrating user knowledge and scientific knowledge in management decision making, to be held in Iceland in January 2003.
The conference will bring together hunters, managers and scientists in an open forum to discuss how the two knowledge systems differ and how they are similar, and where they converge.
The conclusions from this comparison will aid the discussion on how management decisions can better take account of user knowledge as well as science.
January 16, 2002
A senior Japanese government official today accused Greenpeace of misleading the public to cover up its failed anti-whaling campaign in the Antarctic.
Mr. Masayuki Komatsu, Counsellor in the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries was responding to the Greenpeace press release issued on January 16, accusing Japan of spending its overseas development aid to buy votes in the International Whaling Commission.
"Greenpeace was reverted to their usual misleading propaganda and rhetoric to cover up the total failure of its campaign in the Antarctic" said Mr. Komatsu.
"Japan is the world's largest donor, providing aid to over 150 countries and this aid is not linked to the policies of recipient nations on specific issues" he said. "These accusations are inaccurate and insulting not only to Japan but to aid recipient nations.
In fact, Japanese aid is provided to a large number of countries including India, Argentina, Brazil and Kenya that are opposed to Japan's position on whaling" he added.
Mr. Komatsu said "Greenpeace has not told the public the truth on this issue.
They should be telling the public that the International Whaling Commission's Scientific Committee has noted that Japan's whale research in the Antarctic is providing important scientific information."
Mr. Komatsu explained that the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling requires that the IWC's regulations be based on scientific findings.
"Rather than criticizing Japan's whale research program and wasting money touring around the Antarctic drinking beer and baking cookies as they have themselves reported, Greenpeace should be spending some of its money to conduct research."
Mr. Komatsu further criticized Greenpeace by saying "Greenpeace is not about saving whales it is about fundraising.
Whales have already been saved and are increasing to the point where there is now worldwide concern about the impact of whales on fish stocks."
"Even the IWC last year unanimously adopted a resolution jointly proposed by the United States and Japan to make the study of interactions between whales and fisheries a matter of priority."
January 9, 2002
A senior official in Japan's Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Mr. Masayuki Komatsu, today issued a challenge to Australian Parliamentary Secretary Sharman Stone to tell the Australian public the truth about Japan's whale research program in the Antarctic.
Mr. Komatsu said "Parliamentary Secretary Dr. Sharman Stone is clearly misinformed about whaling issues. I urge her to read the reports of the International Whaling Commisison's Scientific Committee and tell the Australian public the truth. The fact is that Japan's whale research in the Antarctic is providing valuable scientific information."
Mr. Komatsu's remarks came in response to a press release issued by Dr. Stone's office on January 2, 2002 following a meeting in the Antarctic between the Australian icebreaker Aurora Australis and Japan's whale research vessels. Mr. Komatsu said "if Dr. Stone had done her homework before simply repeating the anti-whaling rhetoric of Greenpeace, she would know that both the quality and quantity of data from Japan's research programs have been commended by the IWC's Scientific Committee."
In 1997, the IWC's Scientific Committee conducted a major review of Japan's whale research program in the Antarctic. This review concluded that that the research program has provided considerable data which could be directly relevant for management and that the results of this program have the potential to improve the management of minke whales. Contrary to Dr. Stone's comments, the Scientific Committee also noted that non-lethal means to obtain some of this information are unlikely to be successful in the Antarctic.
Mr. Komatsu said "I don't know if the Australian public ever listens to parliamentary secretaries but if they did so on this occasion they were certainly misinformed. Dr. Stone's comments directly contradict the conclusions of the IWC's Scientific Committee." Mr. Komatsu also urged "Dr. Stone should also read the text of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling so that she would know that the reason whale meat ends up on Japanese dinner plates is because the Convention requires that the by-products of the research be processed." "This is simply a matter that valuable food resources should not be wasted" he added. Mr. Komatsu noted however that Dr. Stone did acknowledge that Japan's whale research program is perfectly legal under the Convention.
Mr. Komatsu explained that "historically, Australia, New Zealand and a number of other western countries decimated whales stocks only for their oil and wastefully dumped 90% of the whale carcass while Japan has a long tradition of fully using the animals caught without waste." "Further," he said "Australia is not doing any significant research on whales. They should understand that the management of all of our marine resources should be based on scientific findings and appreciate Japan's research as a significant contribution".
Mr. Komatsu explained that Japan's research program in the Antarctic began in 1987 in response to claims that there was insufficient scientific information on whales and that the program involves both lethal and non-lethal research techniques such as sighting surveys and biopsy sampling. "While certain information can be obtained through non-lethal means, other information requires sampling of internal organs such as ovaries, ear plugs and stomachs" he said.
Mr. Komatsu explained that while Australia has a position opposed to whaling, anti-whaling is not the majority world-view. In fact, in 1992, the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, reaffirmed the provisions of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, an agreement that permits whaling on the high seas, and explicitly rejected the efforts of anti-whaling nations to exclude whales from the list of resources open to sustainable use and development. Further, at both the 1997 and 2000 Conferences of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, more than half the countries present supported the controlled use of minke whales. Many fishing nations including Norway, China, Korea, Russia and Iceland, as well as many developing countries support the sustainable use of all marine resources (including whales) and research programs that provide for science based resource management decisions.
Mr. Komatsu noted that even Australia supported a resolution adopted by consensus at last year's meeting of the IWC to make the study of interactions between whale stocks and fisheries a matter of priority. Mr. Komatsu said "perhaps parliamentary secretary Stone doesn't understand that this means that we need to examine stomach contents of some number of whales".
Mr. Komatsu said "Sustainable use of resources is the world standard. Australia, along with New Zealand, are beginning to be isolated on the issue of whaling". "Australia's position that its OK to kill millions of kangaroos each year and at the same time criticize Japan for killing 440 minke whales from an abundant population in the Antarctic is simply an irrational, hypocritical double standard" he said. "Dr. Stone should stick to kangaroos but if she wants a briefing on the issue of whales, I would be happy to send 1 or 2 of my staff to explain these matters" said Mr. Komatsu.
January 2, 2002
-Greenpeace is misleading the public about whaling, writes Dan Goodman, who works a whale research institute in Tokyo-
As it has done in past, Greenpeace recently again harassed Japan's whale research vessels in the Antarctic.
This high-profile publicity stunt against a scientifically valid and legal research programme is simply an effort to increase Greenpeace's support and wealth. For this purpose, Greenpeace continues to mislead the public about the status of whale stocks and the scientific value of Japan's whale research.
In mid-December, research vessels began the 15th year of Japan's Antarctic whale research programme.
The research programme involves both a sighting survey whose primary purpose is the estimation of trends in abundance, and a sampling component that involves the take of up to 440 minke whales from a population estimated by the scientific committee of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) in 1990 at 760,000 animals.
Since the IWC's scientific committee calculated that 2000 minke whales could be harvested from the Antarctic each year, for the next 100 years with no risk to the stock, the take of only 440 whales for research purposes is obviously not a conservation issue.
Two years ago, the Greenpeace vessel Arctic Sunrise with its helicopter and rubber boats followed and harassed Japan's whale research vessels in order to portray and photograph themselves as saviours.
The reckless antics of Greenpeace activists caused a collision between the Arctic Sunrise and the Japanese research vessel and risked the safety and lives of crews and scientists.
This year the Arctic Sunrise and Greenpeace have resumed their attempts to interfere with Japan's whale research programme and feed the media with photographs and releases that continue their campaign of misinformation.
Greenpeace should instead commend Japan's Antarctic whale research programme and encourage other members of the IWC to undertake similar research.
The management of all of our marine resources should be based on scientific information and the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) specifically requires that regulations related to whaling be based on scientific findings.
Greenpeace should spend some of the hundreds of millions of dollars it receives in public donations on research rather than on stunts.
If Greenpeace told the truth about whales and whaling, the public would know that most whales are not endangered, that Japan's whale research programme in the Antarctic is legal and has a sound scientific basis.
But that would cause Greenpeace to lose millions of dollars in donations. Clearly, they have an economic interest in continuing their campaign of "hype, half-truths and posturing", as described by a former director of Greenpeace International.
Japan's whale research programme in the Antarctic began with a pilot project in 1987-88 and has continued since then.
The primary reason for conducting the research is to address "inadequate knowledge" that was used by the IWC as the reason for the adoption of its moratorium in 1982.
Other reasons for the research include finding out the role of whales in the Antarctic ecosystem and the impact of environmental change on whales.
The Antarctic programme is the only long-term research programme that can address these important questions.
The legal basis for it is Article VIII of the 1946 ICRW, which unequivocally provides that "contracting parties" may grant permits authorising the take of whales for purposes of scientific research.
Further, Article VIII requires that "any whales taken under these special permits shall so far as practicable be processed and the proceeds shall be dealt with in accordance with directions issued by the Government by which the permit was granted".
This means that the Convention requires the utilisation of meat and other by-products of the research.
Japan's programme in the Antarctic is fully consistent with these provisions of the ICRW and Japan's rights as a signatory to this convention.
Greenpeace has labelled the research programme as "commercial whaling in disguise" since the meat is sold on the market in Japan.
This is clearly a misrepresentation of the ICRW's requirements.
More than 100 data items and samples are taken from each whale, including ear plugs for age determination studies, reproductive organs for examination of maturation and reproductive cycles and rates, stomachs for analysis of food consumption, and blubber thickness is measured to assess the condition of whales.
More than 130 scientific papers have resulted from the research.
Much of the analyses done by foreign scientists involved in the work of the IWC have used data from this research.
The IWC's scientific committee has commended the quality and quantity of data derived from this research.
It has said programme has the potential to improve the management of minke whales.
Contrary to statements of Greenpeace and the Government of New Zealand, the scientific committee has also noted that non-lethal means to obtain some of this information are unlikely to be successful in the Antarctic.
Rather than referring to the IWC's scientific committee, Greenpeace chooses to refer to resolutions of the IWC's plenary sessions, which were adopted for political reasons and without scientific basis and which urge Japan to refrain from issuing special permits for taking whales. Like the IWC itself, Greenpeace is putting politics ahead of science.
Greenpeace has also made much of the fact that Japan's take of whales for research occurs in an area declared by the IWC as the Southern Ocean Sanctuary and that the programme continues while the IWC's moratorium remains in effect.
Buy why doesn't Greenpeace say that neither the moratorium nor the Southern Ocean Sanctuary applies to the take of whales for research purposes?
That would be the truth, but it would further undermine its fundraising capability.
Opposition to Japan's research programme in the Antarctic is not a reflection of widespread opinion.
In fact, opposition to this research comes from a small number of countries where special interest NGOs have a major influence on Government policy related to whales and whaling.
If Greenpeace told the truth, it would also say that sustainable whaling and the consumption of whale meat in Japan is consistent with the declaration signed by 95 States at the 1995 United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation's international conference on the sustainable contribution of fisheries to food security.
This declaration called for "an increase in the respect and understanding of social, economic and cultural differences among States and regions in the use of living resources, especially cultural diversity in dietary habits".
The fact is that the principles of sustainable use of resources and respect for cultural diversity are worldwide standards.
The position of those opposed to whaling, irrespective of the status of stocks, is contrary to these widely accepted principles.
New Zealand had a whaling industry that contributed to the over-harvesting and depletion of whale stocks. New Zealand also killed whales for scientific research purposes.
Now there is a flourishing whale-watching industry in New Zealand.
No one is suggesting that whaling be resumed in New Zealand waters but there is no scientific basis for the Government of New Zealand's opposition to the sustainable take of whales by people with different cultures who view whales as food.
In the United States, "environmental" organisations that cause property damage or spike trees with metal objects in an attempt to prevent logging are called "eco-terrorists".
Greenpeace activities in the Antarctic that have caused damage to property and risk the safety of vessel crews and researchers are no different.
When the Greenpeace vessel Arctic Sunrise left the South African port of Cape Town in November, Greenpeace was silent on its destination.
Auckland Greenpeace campaigner Sarah Duthie was quoted in a Cape Town newspaper as saying, "One of our biggest weapons is the element of surprise."
Even her vocabulary demonstrates that Greenpeace views its confrontation as war rather than "peaceful protest".
| |
