The case of the dolphins from Solomon Islands

Posted on March 9, 2010 by Chico

Sometime ago I saw a documentary on Chris Porter and his Endeavour to export wild dolphins from the Solomon Islands to Dubai. The piece ended at the time when the dolphins had arrived to Dubai but the Hotel Atlantis (where the dolphins were to live from then on) fail to display them to the public for a long period, leading activists to believe that the animals were dead (or most of them).

On my post “The [bloody] Cove”, I did mention this, but I was then corrected by Jorge Mateus, that the dolphins are alive. He also advised that I should be careful with what I post online, without due verification of the facts, and that the fact “call myself” a scientist bears a responsibility to have all facts correct, especially when I point out some flaws on other’s work.

I took that paragraph from the post straight away, to avoid leaving it floating on the web, with untrue information.

He is very right about this, and I will make sure I won’t repeat it, and I do thank him for his constructive critique.

Nevertheless I would like to take the case of Solomon Island dolphins, since I found some time to take his advice and get informed; and also about this “dolphinariums” business as a whole (again). And with it restore the truth on the subject.

———————————
Before I get onto the Solomon case I would like to express my high spirits and cheer for The Cove winning the Oscar for Best Documentary!

It is also screening in Portugal. You can watch it at

Lisboa
UCI Cinemas – El Corte Inglés
Cinema City Classic Alvalade

Setúbal
Zon Lusomundo Almada Forum

Porto – Vila Nova de Gaia
UCI Arrábida 20

However, screenings in Japan don’t go as smooth…The following text is from Ric O’Barry:
My only question is: what do they have to hide?

“(…) But there are threats on the horizon. Officials in Japan are threatening repercussions against university and community groups that dare to show The Cove. Dolphin-killing fishermen’s unions are threatening lawsuits against theaters that show the film. There are even some signs that I could face arrest in Japan, even though I’ve broken no laws whatsoever.

We wont give in to this pressure. Instead, I am making plans to spend months in Japan with our Save Japan Dolphins Team. I want to be wherever we can find an audience. Our message will particularly resonate with young people, to whom we need to reach out with the dangers of mercury-contaminated dolphin meat and the slaughter of dolphins they love as much as we do.”

———————————
But back to the Solomon dolphins’ case; just because they are alive, and I was wrong by saying they died during transport, doesn’t make it (the export of wild dolphins and the dolphinarium industry) more righteous in any way!

When I started to read more about the Solomon Islands dolphins, Chris Porter and the Solomon Islands Marine Mammal Education Centre and Exporters Limited (MMECEL), Directed by Robert Satu, found that the first outcry from the international community related to the shipping of wild dolphin from this small pacific islands were heard in 2003, when a shipping to Mexico was made.

Soon after 2003 shipments the government banned the export of wild dolphins, due to the international outcry. But Satu took it to court and won. Also the government – which changed since the shipments to Mexico – gave its blessing and a high-level delegation was at Dubai to mark the dolphins’ arrival.

What stricken me most about all this is 2 basic elements:
1) Both Dubai and the Solomon Islands are part of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). So, how this exportation did happen?
2) The scientific grounds and the welfare of the animals.

All international forums have their flaws and CITES is no different.

The order Cetacea (that bear all whales and dolphins) is found on the Appendix II of CITES (and many other species of toothed and baleen Cetaceans are also included on Appendix I).

The highest level of protection is afforded to the more than 800 Appendix I species designated as being in immediate danger of extinction[1]. With very few exceptions, commercial trade in Appendix I species is banned. These species include the highly vulnerable species like whale, elephant, tiger, gorilla and marine turtle, along with a large number of additional wild cats, parrots, parakeets, cockatoos and macaws.

Species listed on CITES Appendix II are recognized to require protection from trade, but not to the point of a ban. While trade may be allowed in Appendix II species, any international trade or transfer of such an animal or its derivative products requires an export permit issued by the authorities of the nation where the animal product is located and in some instances an import permit issued by the country where the animal product will be received. In theory, these restrictions on trade in Appendix II species are designed to regulate trade in order to ensure that these species are not exploited to the point where they require Appendix I protections.

William Rossiter from Cetacean Society International (CSI) described the loophole used by Chris Carter on CSI’s Whales Alive! - Vol. XVI No. 3 – July 2007.

“(…) Porter’s plan relies on the CITES “non-determination finding” (NDF) that must accompany the export. The purpose of an NDF is to certify that the international trade in a CITES-listed species will not be detrimental to the population, backed up by credible data on the abundance and distribution of the listed plant or animal. No adequate data is known to exist for the Solomon Islands dolphins, according to many scientists CSI questioned. In late June Porter, finally admitting what everyone knows, hired a U.S. scientist to get some data, albeit a little late. Porter’s MEL [Marine Export Ltd] partners include Wildlife International Network Inc. (WIN), including Robin Friday, Mark Simmons, and Ted N. Turner, although Turner may have left. In Panama WIN calls itself “Ocean Embassy”, where their extremely controversial permit to capture 80 local dolphins for captive display and probable sale continues to fuel such a public fury that it might be on hold when you read this.

The CITES Secretariat cannot reject an NDF, but can recommend that the importing nation question or reject the exporter’s NDF. The dolphins now appear to be aimed at Dubai, which may follow the CITES expected recommendation and reject the import. Mexico did not follow CITES’ recommendation to question the data in 2003, embarrassing the nation with the results. The Solomon Islands were not a member of CITES in 2003, but joined in late June. (…)” [2]

Also, as explained by the Species Survival Network and WWF International:

“(…)There is a significant lack of scientific information on the stocks of T. aduncus (or any other dolphin species) in Solomon Islands waters, as confirmed by the chair of the IUCN Cetacean Specialist Group (CSG) in letters submitted to the CITES Secretariat and Solomon Islands government in June 2007 (IUCN CSG 2007a, b). The Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission also discussed the 2003 live captures of bottlenose dolphins in Solomon Islands, noting that “[n]o estimates of abundance, population structure or vital rates are available” and re-iterating its “recommendation that any live captures should be proceeded by a full assessment of status” (IWC Scientific Committee 2004). Consequently, these past and potential future exports represent a failure in the implementation of CITES Article IV, which requires science-based non-detriment findings before export of Appendix II species is allowed.(…)” [3]

Despite all the diligences made to CITES and the scientific indetermination surrounding the issue, Solomon Islands officially permit 100 dolphins to be exported per year. Rossiter explained the capture method used by the people of the Solomon’s in the CSI Whales Alive! - Vol. XVII No. 1 – January 2008, he described that in order to reach that quota, local fishermen use primitive methods that injure or kill hundreds of dolphins, with many social units being destroyed. The selected survivors are then transported long distances in open boats to a captivity facility. But even there, they are far from save, being further culled by illness, death, or just being released in waters too far from their home waters to survive. “From the moment of capture all these dolphins are as good as dead as far as the survival of their populations in concerned.”[3]

They might also argue that isn’t necessary to use the precautionary approach since there are “plenty” dolphin in the Solomon’s, so they can be killed by the hundreds.

In Iki, Japan, dolphins used to be killed by the thousands, and they were in fact streaming by the coast, now a day that abundance is gone, most due to the captivity trade, that is so lucrative. But now they go buy them in Taiji, to furnish their dolphinariums. [5]

Solomon Islanders, say they know it better, and that catches are sustainable; while the world’s best scientists confirm that no one knows how many Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins live in Solomon Island waters, or what the local populations are like. They argue that “local knowledge” gives them the basis to estimate an adequate quota for exportation. Rossiter reasons further, “In truth, they do not care; the species is considered a pest in many areas, and has almost none of the value that spinner, spotted and other cetaceans have as meat, and for teeth valued for bridal dowries.”

According to the Solomon’s Fisheries Minister Nollen Leni, each dolphin on the Dubai market goes for US$200,000 (around 147,000€) revealing the value of the country’s “new million dollar” industry. If you multiply this unit value for the 100 dolphins they are allowed to sell per year. [6]

And quoting Robert Satu, the front man from MMECEL: “It’s big – bigger than gold or logging” [7]

Rossiter puts it well when he reflects about the social reality of the Solomon Islands:

“Who can blame them? We are not wasting your time or our space with details of how the Solomon Islands dolphin market got where it is today, much less the government turnovers and intrigue, but it has been a sad, fascinating experience for us to study the struggles of a society plagued by social violence and unrest, three government upheavals since 2003, and the corrupting influence of outsiders with promises of lots of money for a locally worthless animal. Why should they care if their new market threatens the core of CITES?

The raw power of money both separates and links Dubai and Solomon Islands. Solomon Islands is resource-rich and money-poor, while Dubai is so oil-rich the nation’s explosive development to date proves that anything is possible if the cost is irrelevant. Both nations are equally unfazed by international concerns and equally efficient at keeping prying eyes away from their dolphins. Little did we know that the Solomon Islands_Dubai trade had been planned since 2004! We suspect shipments to Dubai and China are due, but have no clue when or where the dolphins will end up.”

The chorus of disapproval and examples detailing how ineffective CITES was on this matter goes forever. The main reason why CITES didn’t had any effect on this issue is simple. Solomon Islands and Dubai do not care about science; they care about profit and luxury!

They also don’t care about the dolphin’s welfare either, and even that it is true that some of the dolphins captured and maintained in pens for exportation in the Solomon’s reached Dubai, many die still in the Solomon’s.

An independent observer described the facility where the dolphins are kept: “Dolphins are kept in shallow pens so close to the sea that it’s hard to understand why they don’t try to escape by jumping the slim barrier. But they don’t and instead lie traumatized, hungry and limp. Their fate is shocking. Many die of starvation and shock. Others have been transported to Honiara, kept in holding pens for a few days, packed into open trucks travelling to the airport and put on planes (…)” [8]

Even days prior to the export to Dubai at least 3 dolphins were found dead near a holding pen. And other sources say that at least 30 other animals are buried in the vicinity. [2] [6]

It is hard to tell more precisely the amount of dolphins that die in those pens because if anyone tries to get close to them they are “attacked by the thugs who work for Chris Porter” [8]

That is how transparent they are on their work!

However, I must say it gives me a grim of irony every time I read the work education, related to any dolphin show, or in the case of the Solomon Islands, that same word attached to the export company name. It might be entertaining, it might be amusing, but it is not educational. There is nothing education about a dolphin doing tricks, over loud music in confinement and just because the trainer (and the audience) wants it too.

I got some tourists in the Canaries where I did some studies on dolphin-whale watching boat interactions who were very disappointed because they were expecting the dolphins to jump, do acrobatics, come to the boat to touch their hands with their flippers, and kiss them, because that is what they see on the dolphin shows! My reply was always the same, “here you see them for what they are, this is not a dolphin show” and I would go further and explain them why they shouldn’t go to a dolphinarium ever again…

And that same grim of irony expands they people tell me that, “dolphinariums in Europe and the U.S. are very different from the ones in Mexico and other developing countries”. To those I would encourage them to read an excellent piece by Naomi Rose, who I had the pleasure of meeting in Limerich back in 2004 during the IFAW forum on sustainability. It is titled The Solomon Islands Dolphins: The Myth of “Good” Marine Parks. [Read it here]

Back in 2002 even Portugal wanted to import 10 live wild dolphins to Zoomarine and the Lisbon Zoo from Guinea-Bissau. Interesting was the fact that Cuba went ahead and offered the same dolphins, before the activist against captivity could even react to the Guinea-Bissau case! It is a lot of money and many want a slice of that pie. [9] [10] [11] National Authorities didn’t allow the importation.

Bottom line is: Dolphins do not belong in captivity and we have dramatic examples of this that come to the media time after time. The most recent being Tillikum, an Orca from SeaWorld that killed its trainer Dawn Brancheau; this same Dolphin – orcas are dolphins, not whales – was involved in the deaths of 2 other people, the first death when Tillikum was property of Sealand, and other 2 after he was sold to SeaWorld. [12]

Bruce Bott, a diver who has studied whales for 40 years and recently completed a book about whale-human interactions, was briefly employed at Sealand and said the facility bears some responsibility.

Bott, who worked with the whales, but left before Tillikum arrived, said food withdrawal was regularly used when whales would not obey instructions.[13]

Not to mention the medication administrated to the dolphins trying to relieve them from the stress they endure due to confinement, that also lead to ulcers and other conditions.

However, there isn’t any record of an Orca killing any human in the wild, so you can take your own conclusions. Mine are the same of Louie Psihoyos “ the real killer is SeaWorld. By stressing this creatures in small tanks and forcing them do stupid tricks for spectacles of dominance they are committing crimes against humanity and nature”

Ric O’barry also commented saying that: “I trained “Hugo” the first killer whale in captivity east of the Mississippi – back in 1968. I knew then that this was a very bad idea and I walked away from his tank at the Miami Seaquarium. I went public with my opinion but the bastards would not listen. They were blinded by the money!“

I will close this post with a final quote by Jacques Cousteau:

“There is about as much educational benefit to be gained in studying dolphins in captivity as there would be studying mankind by only observing prisoners held in solitary confinement.”

Here’s a video with some good comments on dolphin captivity.

[1] http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/how.shtml
[2] http://csiwhalesalive.org/csi07307.html
[3] http://www.ssn.org/Documents/news_articles_SI_exports_EN.htm
[4] http://csiwhalesalive.org/csi08105.html
[5] Comments by Hardy James, founder of bluevoice.org on 2009 Oscar Winner Documentary “The Cove”, Directed by Louie Psihoyos
[6] http://www.wildsingapore.com/news/20070910/071012-6.htm
[7] http://www.underwatertimes.com/news.php?article_id=10807251439
[8] http://australiansforanimals.org.au/solomonislands.htm
[9] http://www.amigospais-guaracabuya.org/oagcw098.php
[10] http://www.captiveanimals.org/aquarium/portugal.htm
[11] http://www.acsonline.org/issues/conservationRpts/Conservation0202.html#dolphins
[12] http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-6239677-504083.html
[13] http://www2.canada.com/scripts/story.html?id=2614181

A importância dos “oceanários” na conservação dos oceanos

Posted on January 22, 2010 by Chico

Por várias vezes aconteceu estar a fazer pesquisas sobre conservação de tartarugas em África, quais os stocks saudáveis de peixe para consumo em Portugal, áreas marinhas protegidas, práticas de sustentabilidade entre outros e o Oceanário de Lisboa é uma constante nos resultados dessas buscas.

A semana passada, uma pessoa do Oceanário de Lisboa perguntou-me se as pessoas ligadas a instituições como a Greenpeace e o Fundo Internacional para a Protecção da Vida Animal (IFAW), como é o meu caso, viam ou não com bons olhos o trabalho desenvolvido pelo Oceanário de Lisboa.

Esse penso ser um estigma já ultrapassado, porque acredito que desde que sejam dadas as devidas condições para os animais serem mantidos em cativeiro, e existem vários indicadores de bem-estar que podem ser monitorizados, estes transformam-se autênticos embaixadores do mundo oceânico, que permitem a milhares de pessoas (o oceanário festejou recentemente a visita do visitante 12 milhões) ter contacto com um mundo submerso que de outra forma seria totalmente impossível.

Mas uma coisa é a posição oficial da Greenpeace ou IFAW, outra é as pessoas que trabalham com eles, que nem sempre reflectem a posição pública da ONG, e que muitas vezes é algo extremista.

Penso ainda que existe uma diferença abismal entre uma instituição como o Oceanário de Lisboa e por exemplo, empresas como delfinários (onde se proporcionam espectáculos com golfinhos e outros animais, que fazem truques e acrobacias a troco de comida, para contentamento da audiência), em que nestes não é possível proporcionar um bem-estar adequado. Os golfinhos baseiam a sua vida na acústica, e para um animal que consegue distinguir uma bola com 6,5cm de outra com 7,5cm a 70 metros de distância, através de meios acústicos, uma vida numa piscina em que cada uso do seu sistema de ecolocação se converte em tortura com o reflexo do som em todas as paredes do tanque onde estão cativos a entrar nos seus cérebros e a descarregar informação de confinamento. Estes em cativeiro deixam mesmo de usar o seu sistema de percepção sensorial.
Claro que a solução não é libertar estes animais, visto que muitos deles, já nascidos em cativeiro (que é um evento não muito comum, difícil de acontecer naturalmente e de manter as crias vivas até à idade adulta), não se adaptariam ao meio natural.
Contudo oponho-me à captura destes animais, do seu ambiente natural para piscinas de entretenimento, para satisfazer a um público que fica com uma ideia totalmente deturpada do comportamento natural destes cetáceos, da sua fisiologia, ecologia e dignidade.

O papel do Oceanário de Lisboa, bem diferente de um delfinário, e de instituições similares na actualidade é vital para a conservação e consciencialização social para os problemas que assolam os oceanos e as criaturas que vivem e de ele dependem.

“O Oceanário celebra a vida na Terra através de uma visão deslumbrante da vasta e complexa diversidade de seres vivos que habitam este Oceano Global, evocando o papel vital que este exerce na saúde e evolução planetária.”
Francisca Menezes Ferreira in “Pavilhão do Oceanos – Exposição Mundial de Lisboa de 1998″

As pessoas quando vêm acreditam, quando lêem, nem sempre. Ou é uma realidade tão distante que não se conseguem relacionar. É esse o papel do oceanário, aproximar realidades, e deslumbrar-nos, sempre que olhamos para aquele enorme tanque.

E esta é uma história de que como este papel é importante.

“O Pollock do Alasca (Theragra chalcogramma) caiu de “a melhor escolha” para “uma boa alternativa” para os consumidores, na última avaliação da espécie pelo Monterey Bay Aquarium, que publica a lista/cartão Seafood Watch usado por milhões de restaurantes quando encomendam peixe.”

E com as falhas na governança internacional a todos os níveis que esta tenta actuar resta-nos a nós, através de instrumentos como este fazer uma escolha, e que essa seja um futuro melhor para nós e as gerações vindouras.

1º Workshop SUSTAINAMICS

Posted on December 23, 2009 by Chico

A semana passada (dia 16 de Dezembro 2009) participei no 1º workshop do projecto SUSTAINAMICS.

O projecto SUSTAINAMICS – Modelação Participada para a Avaliação Integrada da Sustentabilidade, que aborda o desafio “Como criar uma visão holística dos problemas que afectam a sustentabilidade dos ambientes marinhos e costeiros em Portugal?”.

Foi organizado pelos Centro de Investigação em Ambiente e Sustentabilidade (CENSE) da FCT/UNL e Centro de Investigação e Estudos de Sociologia (CIES) do ISCTE; e teve lugar no Auditório António Silva Leal na Ala Autónoma do ISCTE (Instituto Universitário de Lisboa).

Foi um exercício interessante. Presentes estavam pessoas de vários sectores da sociedade (relacionados com a pesca, transportes marítimos, almirantes, gente do governo, gente de ONGs, académicos, entre outros), divididos por 4 mesas temáticas distintas. Governança, sobre-exploração de recursos, problemas das zonas costeiras, e ordenamento do território marítimo.

Foi-nos pedido então para relacionarmos causas e consequências que intervinham nas temáticas apresentadas, com repercussões positivas ou negativas. Ou seja, a falta de fiscalização levava a uma maior sobre-exploração de recursos, e assim por diante. No final foram feitas apresentações sobre cada uma das temáticas e foram dados 5 votos, para que cada um dos envolvidos pudesse assinalar nos esquemas as causas e/ou consequências que achava mais pertinentes.

O segundo workshop irá ter lugar no final Janeiro ou inicio de Fevereiro de 2010.

Para saber mais: aqui e aqui

Informação em http://www.dcea.fct.unl.pt/cense/

END OF THE LINE – 2048!

Posted on December 22, 2009 by Chico

The first time I saw the groundbreaking movie, End of the Line was at the 61^st International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting in Madeira, Portugal, last June. It was brought as a last minute feature; in fact it was shown after the meeting had closed, by Melanie Salmon, CEO of the UK based charity Global Ocean.

Then during the Rip Curl Pro Search, surf championship, in Peniche (October), Portugal, I had the chance, thanks to Melanie Salmon and George Duffield (producer of the movie) of screening it to a small audience, and see their faces of astonishment for the facts lay down before them.

Last November, the Portuguese Platform of Non Governmental Organizations, PESCA (meaning fishery in Portuguese), hosted a great event at the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation in Lisbon, followed by a debate on the state of fisheries, worldwide. Present at the discussion was the author the book that inspired the movie, Charles Clover; César Deben from the European Commisson; representatives from NGOs and Portuguese fisheries. It was very interesting, and I was impressed by Mr. Clover direct and intense responses at the EU politician present, basically saying that “what your are doing is not enough, do better, do it now!”. Superb!

About the movie:
I was blown away by it, and felt a few shivers down my spine, when confronted with the facts and concrete reality of today’s oceans, our responsibility towards them. Fish is running out, and we (humans) are not slowing down to get every last one of them! The United Nations state the ocean as property, not of fisherman, not of any company or multinational, nor from an entity but from the citizen, like you and me. It is time to claim them back, care about them and allow it to heal, recover, and so we can still use the resources it offer us, on a sustainable way, and perpetuate its uses into the future.

Now, it is clear, we have reached the limits of what the ocean is capable of providing; the end of a finite resource that will run-out if we do not take appropriate measures, NOW!

“Scientists predict that if we continue fishing as we are now, we will see the end of most seafood by 2048.

The End of the Line chronicles how demand for cod off the coast of Newfoundland in the early 1990s led to the decimation of the most abundant cod population in the world, how hi-tech fishing vessels leave no escape routes for fish populations and how farmed fish as a solution is a myth.

The film lays the responsibility squarely on consumers who innocently buy endangered fish, politicians who ignore the advice and pleas of scientists, fishermen who break quotas and fish illegally, and the global fishing industry that is slow to react to an impending disaster.

The End of the Line points to solutions that are simple and doable, but political will and activism are crucial to solve this international problem.

We need to control fishing by reducing the number of fishing boats across the world, protect large areas of the ocean through a network of marine reserves off limits to fishing, and educate consumers that they have a choice by purchasing fish from independently certified sustainable fisheries.”
Read more here!

Greenpeace developed a Seafood Red List. Using it you can power yourself to change things around by your ultimate decision-making as a consumer. If there is no market, there is no industry for it, pretty simple.

The problems of the ocean are easy to forget, with calm seas, blue skies, a gentle breeze, a wonderful sunset the problems beneath the surface, are far from sight, thus far from mind.

We need to save the oceans from harm sway. If we want to see the Tuna, Shark, Cod, Salmon, Shrimp and so many other species, strive and recover and the endangered stamp they have been “awarded” taken away.

It is time for something; we humans are normally afraid, CHANGE.

CHANGE in fishing methods;
CHANGE in fishing practices;
CHANGE in fish consuming habits;
(to allow fish stocks to recover)
CHANGE the way we think about the oceans;
(and the need of Marine Protected Areas off limits to fisheries)
CHANGE our MIND and CLAIM the oceans back to us!

The End of Whaling in the Southern Ocean (?!?!)

Posted on December 21, 2009 by Chico

I recall the message from the pro surfer and environmentalist warrior Dave Rastovich, just days before the 61^st International Whaling Commission meeting started in Madeira, Portugal. He ended it by saying that “Honour and respect are nowhere to be found within the modern whaling crime”.

This sentence to me marked that meeting and period, when Japan uses corruption end to meet his aims, with no regard to nature and the livelihood and heritage of the next generations, using resources for profit or stubbornness, if that resources goes extinct, it doesn’t really matter. The IWC61 itself was a big hole full of nothing, and especially big governmental mouths full of empty words and no actions, no resolutions and no whales saved during that meeting.

Mr. Mark Simmonds summed it up very well when he wrote on his blog: “So where were we – ah yes in the gloom of a vast meeting chamber of a big international meeting room where ‘nothing is decided until everything is decided’ … or possibly just ‘nothing is decided’”

I was profoundly sad and as it has been usual during the last period that I’ve attended the IWC and done actions and contributed to the movement devoted to end whaling, I was feeling what I like to call a “post-action depression”. Happens after a very intense period of work and by the end of it nothing has been accomplished. Our struggle was in vain, and it has been since Japan started whaling in the southern ocean sanctuary, to recruit countries to their side, and established a stalemate inside the IWC, meaning that nothing changes year after year.

But some light is shinning ahead, maybe it is a tunnel end, or not…

In the beginning of the year I wrote an entry titled “And if the crisis would solve the whaling issue?” where I wondered that even though “we cannot really forecast what will happen, and do nothing but wondering about it [while we keep fighting to make whaling history], the fuel prices will fell dramatically, the Japanese whaling industry and hardware is getting old and they been having repeated misfortunes lately. The Oriental Bluebird, the refueling vessel that would go down to the Antarctic lost its registration and Panamá flag and is now registered in Japan requiring more staff and funds etc.”

Now it seems that my thoughts were not so astray.

The eminent change it is not only due to crisis, but to a number of given situations lead by it. Political change in Japan itself; shortly after taking office last October the Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama confide his dislike for whale meat saying that “I hate whale meat”.

Even thou the government at the time was showing no signs of discontinue the policy followed by his antecedents; buttressing up an unnecessary, unsustainable and uneconomic industry that has no place in the 21st century, now things seem to be changing.

IFAW was also focusing efforts inside Japan and with other NGOs such as Greenpeace urged the new Prime Minister to rethink about Japan stance on whaling and its national fleet.

The end of whaling in the southern ocean seems a possible reality now! I have withstand long conversations with Milko Schvartzman from Greenpeace International, and his belief was that if we are to save whales, the frontline of resistance must be inside Japan, our activism our efforts must come from within. Us on the outside are like little helpers, and can do just up to some point. My dear friend Sidney Holt also shared that vision; he always says that whaling has to be so economically unbearable that it is abandoned.

Now it seems that crisis will also affect whaling. We hope!

Information arrived to me via the Greenpeace International website with the topic: End of Japanese whaling might be in sight.

On it you can read:

“A major review of Japanese government spending could spell the end to whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

Commissioned to cut wasteful programmes by Japan’s new government, a review committee has proposed massive cuts in subsidies to a body which funds the so-called whaling research programme.

Without government subsidies, the whaling programme would be doomed.

The Spending Review Committee recommended that the Overseas Fisheries Cooperation Fund (OFCF), which gives loans to the Institute for Cetacean Research (ICR) to run the discredited science programme, have all of its funding revoked, except monies needed for loans in 2010.

The OFCF claims it needs 70.4 billion yen (around US$780 million) for various programmes, including whaling, in 2010. The Review Committee and Cabinet Office will determine by early next year if the proposed operations for 2010 are actually “necessary” or should also be cut.

The Institute for Cetacean Research, which runs the whaling programme, has failed to repay government loans for several years now, as demand for whale meat has plummeted and the cost of whaling increased. Practises which would have lead to bankruptcy for any commercial firm have been the target of outspoken criticism not only from Greenpeace Japan, but from the business press and even the former spokesperson for the Japanese Foreign Ministry, Tomohiko Taniguchi. Taniguchi lamented the financial propping up of a programme that caused endless headaches for Tokyo abroad and generated revenues worth “less than one-tenth the value of the country’s annual market for toothbrushes.”

With the change in government at the recent election, a new focus on reducing spending and cutting wasteful programmes.

Two Greenpeace activists, Junichi Sato and Toru Suzuki, have spoken out against the cost of the whaling programme and the fact that only a handful of fat-cat bureaucrats really profit from the programme. Last year alone it cost 8 billion yen, or nearly US$90 million, to run the annual Southern Ocean whale hunt. Of that, 1.2 billion yen, or more than US$10 million, came from government subsidies. The rest is in theory covered by the sales of whale meat.”

Still I’m not 100% convinced and I’m afraid that what Japan does is to resize their fleet, keep its recruited countries in sufficient number to take away a 75% majority to the pro-whale bloc inside the IWC thus preventing them from taking resolutions to vote that are binding; and keep on whaling. Other perspective if for Japan to hold its status as it is until the Small Working Group (SWG) negotiations are finished, and accomplish its goals and face-saving.

But I’m optimistic; the actions lead by Junichi and Toru had a big impact, not only in the media but also, because there was some tight control over meat coming from the Antarctic, some Japanese whalers stopped from going boarding for the Antarctic whaling season. Because, without the extra money they were making from meat they kept for free, after returning from the Antarctic, it was not worth to embark on that voyage. For this reason Japan had to start hiring and training whalers from Korea and other countries of Southeast Asia, making whaling even more expensive. Also the toll they get with their recruiting programme in order to have enough support inside the IWC and control roughly 50% of votes is so big that I wonder until when can it keep up, with an industry that doesn’t contribute to the Japanese economy health, and in fact it is a drag and forces Japan to spend taxpayers’ money, rather than making profit.

Now we need to keep up with our work, in my opinion we should even direct more actions and efforts inside Japan, and watch as a economical crisis and the necessity of cuts on public spending, take whalers from the southern ocean sanctuary forever, as it should be!

200 Ballenas Piloto varadas en Tasmania

Posted on March 3, 2009 by Chico

Ayer estaba hablando con Milko (Greenpeace Argentina) sobre el varamiento de ballenas piloto (o calderones) en Tasmania. El me perguntaba “que crees que este pasando en el mundo? según parece cada vez hay mas varamientos, mayoría en Tasmania y Australia. Es algo que cada día me intriga mas, a veces se sabe que es por el sonar de baja frecuencia, o por mucha contaminación sónica. Puede ser que siguen a un compañero de manada perdido o enfermo. Pero seguro que hay otras causas, como la contaminación que les baja las defensas, la falta de oxigeno en el agua en algunas regiones etc.”

Es muy raro lo que pasa con estes animales y estes varamientos en massa. Especialmente en Australia en que este verano los varamientos fueran mas que muchos. A fines de noviembre quedaron varados 187 calderones en Sandy Cape Beach, de los que sólo pudieron ser salvados 32. Una semana antes la gente había logrado salvar a 11 de las 64 ballenas atrapadas en la playa de Anthony’s. En enero murieron 48 cachalotes en un banco de arena frente a la isla de Perkins.

Puede esto ser debido a los ruidos por actividades sísmicas como las perforaciones submarinas para extraer gas o petróleo?

Leer otras fuentes de información: ámbito.com y El Universal (Caracas)

NGOs Lunch, Shark Presentations, and Discussions

Posted on September 18, 2007 by Chico

A week has passed now since the Shark Alliance Conference at the Luso-American Foundation in Lisbon. I had the opportunity and pleasure of being invited by Rémi Parmentier one of the organizers of the event to a lunch prior to the conference. There, I had the opportunity to meet some of the Portuguese NGOs people, also invited due to their proficiency and knowledge on the subject. They also revealed to be very good contacts/sources on whaling matters on the start and get Portugal active on the issue. I arrange to meet some of them this week to see what we can do.
But back to the conference, after a pleasant lunch, we headed for the conference. Good strong presentations, everyone listened carefully and intently. Portuguese Secretary for the Environment, Dr. Humberto Rosa gave a pre-recorded statement to the conference (view video below).

I was quite astonished with some of the facts; the one that stood out more was that Portugal is the third country in EU to kill more sharks. Sharks (much like whales and other mammals) have a slow reproductive cycle and cannot be addressed like a common fish that produces millions of eggs every year. See fact sheet about sharks.

After the last presentation by Rémi Parmentier, the questions and answers part started. This was when the real thing began. At the conference audience were present fishermen, people from the IPIMAR (Fisheries and Ocean Research Institute), that added some spices to discussin. Has Uta Bellion, one of the speakers, pointed out and wisely, this was fantastic because normally we go to conferences and all we do and see is a “priest, preaching to the already converted”, and everyone goes home happy and with their convictions even more reaffirmed. Here we had a good discussion where people spoke and where heard, interacting and searching for answers and ways to address the issue. I think more will come out of this inside the Portuguese community.

I also believe this was very positive and now with the Portuguese presidency of the EU there is a momentum for this nation to stand out on environmental questions, shark conservation is only one of them. I hope I may contribute on a positive way to this on my field, whaling. Portugal is to host the IWC (International Whaling Commission) meeting in 2009 at Madeira and I hope we get some historical outcome there.

Sharks at Risk: Building an EU Conservation Plan (open conference)

Posted on September 5, 2007 by Chico

11th September 2007
Luso-American Foundation
Rua do Sacramento à Lapa 21, 1249-090 Lisboa.
Tel: (+351) 21 393 5800

Sharks, skates and rays are among the most vulnerable and under-protected species in European waters. The IUCN estimates a full third are threatened with extinction due to overfishing. Still, interest in fishing for these species is increasing in the face of inadequate or non-existent limits. Action is urgently needed to safeguard and restore these key components of our ocean ecosystems.
Portugal has assumed the European Union Presidency at a critical time for sharks. The European Commission is formulating its long-awaited Community Plan of Action for Sharks and has pledged completion by 2008.
With its rich maritime history and interest in sustainable fisheries, Portugal is well poised to bring the EU into a new era of responsible shark fishing, recovery of depleted species, and international leadership in global shark conservation.

Click here to download the programme and speakers biographies

Stop the seal hunt

Posted on May 11, 2007 by Chico

A recent scientific study (Leaper and Matthews 2006) examining the Canadian government’s approach for determining the population status for Northwest Atlantic harp seals revealed that the current approach to managing the seal hunt risks seriously depleting the harp seal population by as much as 50 to 70 percent over the next 15 years.

Removing so many animals from any one population places the species at an unnecessary and significant risk. Over the last few years, the Canadian government has raised the annual seal hunt quotas to the highest levels in history, killing almost a million seals in just a three year period. The Total Allowable Catch quota for seals was 85,000 animals higher in 2006 than the “sustainable yield” estimated by Canadian government scientists.
The history of wildlife conservation shows that when large mammals like seals have a price placed on their heads – or hides – the end result is almost always overexploitation. To ensure that wild populations are not put at risk by human activity, a precautionary approach is needed. Yet the DFO management plan does not adequately account for either scientific or environmental uncertainty.
A recent scientific study released by IFAW also shows that in nine of the past eleven years, average ice coverage has fallen to well below levels seen over the last 37 years. This lack of stable ice is negatively impacting the harp seal population which requires sea ice for pupping and nursing its young.
The Canadian government has indicated that it is dedicated to taking ‘real action’ on global warming. Why do they not start by ending the unsustainable and unnecessary hunt for harp seals?

- Text by IFAW – www.stopthesealhunt.com

EcoCasa

Posted on February 26, 2007 by Chico

EcoCasa é um projecto da Quercus para incentivar e alertar a importância de poupar energia e contribuir para um melhor ambiente adoptando para isso técnicas e criando hábitos no nosso dia-a-dias e mais propriamente dentro da nossa casa.

O programa é dividido em 4 tópicos: (1) Lâmpadas, electrodomésticos e sistemas de climatização, (2) Soluções construtivas/Materiais de construção, (3) Energias renováveis, e (4) EcoFamílias.

Existem ainda espaços juvenis para educar as crianças sobre a importância de poupar energia, documentos e relatórios sobre a matéria e ainda espaço onde o comúm utilizador pode fazer perguntas e manter-se actualizado sobre a questão.

Vale bem a visita: www.ecocasa.org

Gossypium in Umbilico

[exteriorized introspections] by Francisco Gonçalves

Category Archives: Environment