Call for Science to Clear Whaling Confusion

Abstract

Negotiations on the future of the International Whaling Commission (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, News of the Week, 30 April, p. [557][1]). In response, a press release issued 7 May (revised 11 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) ([ 1 ][2]). 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 ([ 2 ][3]). 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. 1. [↵][4]Revised Press Release: IWC Chair and Vice-Chair: “If you really care about whale conservation, give our proposal a fair reading” (11 May 2010); [www.iwcoffice.org/_documents/commission/future/RevisedPressReleaseMay10.pdf][5]. 2. [↵][6]IWC, J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 1 (suppl.), 251 (1999). [OpenUrl][7] [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.328.5978.557 [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [5]: http://www.iwcoffice.org/_documents/commission/future/RevisedPressReleaseMay10.pdf [6]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [7]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DJ.%2BCetacean%2BRes.%2BManage.%26rft.volume%253D1%26rft.spage%253D251%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx