Whale Wars and Caribbean Breezes

By Heather Rockwell, CSI Board Alternate

With my bags packed and my mind set to fight for the whales, I flew down to the tropical Caribbean island of St. Kitts. The small island of St. Kitts was hosting the 58th Annual Meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC). The last time a Caribbean nation had hosted an IWC meeting was in Grenada in 1999. However, in just seven short years, the climate at the International Whaling Commission has changed dramatically for whales.

IWC Chair Henrik Fischer and IWC Secretariat
Dr. Nicky Grandy prior to the start of Plenary.
Photo by Heather Rockwell.

For the fourth time in seven years, I was honored to be representing Cetacean Society International (CSI) at the Sub-Committee meetings and the Plenary meeting of the IWC. Like other conservation-minded Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), CSI attends the annual meetings of the IWC to advocate on behalf of the world's whales by pushing for the nonlethal utilization of whale resources and for the continued worldwide ban on commercial whaling. This year's meeting, however, would turn out to be just a little bit different for me.

Upon my arrival in St. Kitts, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that I had been officially appointed as NGO Representative on the U.S. government delegation. In past years, both CSI Director Emeritus Robbins Barstow and CSI Board member Nancy Azzam have been honored to have served the whales and the NGO community in this capacity. I would be working alongside the core U.S. delegation, which included William Hogarth (Commissioner), Doug DeMaster (Alternate Commissioner), Cheri McCarty (NOAA IWC Coordinator), Roger Eckert (NOAA General Counsel), Emily Lindow (NOAA Senior Policy Advisor), John Field (State Department) and Bob Brownell (Senior Scientist). In my position as the NGO spokesperson on the delegation, I was responsible for representing the views of the collective group of U.S. conservation NGOs to the U.S. government delegates, communicating information between the delegation and the NGOs, and actively participating in discussions concerning NGO participation at IWC meetings.

The first week of Sub-Committee meetings (Conservation Committee, RMS Working Group, Infractions, Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling, and the Whale Killing Methods and Associated Welfare Issues Workshop) went by quickly and without much controversy. The Conservation Committee meeting discussions included an update on the Russian "stinky" gray whales (their meat smells from contamination), a report from the ship strike working group, and continued considerations for new whale sanctuaries around the world.

The Revised Management Scheme (RMS) Working Group meeting was chaired by the U.S. Alternate Commissioner, Doug DeMaster, who has been criticized by NGOs for his continued work on an acceptable RMS package that would essentially lead to the resumption of full-scale commercial whaling. The RMS Working Group discussions resulted once again in a stalemate between the pro-whaling and anti-whaling nations, similar to what occurred in March at the RMS Working Group meeting in Cambridge. Neither side could agree on such controversial RMS elements as a code of conduct for special permit (scientific) whaling and the issues of compliance and monitoring of whaling activities. The RMS Working Group discussions were over before they even began and the discussions during Plenary on the RMS would be just as brief.

The 3-day Whale Killing Methods and Associated Welfare Issues workshop offered a unique forum where both anti-whaling and pro-whaling nations could share information regarding whale hunting and euthanasia techniques, time to death analyses, and welfare considerations. Of all the Sub-Committee meetings, this one seemed to attract the most countries and to engage them in the most debates and discussions. However, from a U.S. NGO standpoint, the workshop was a huge disappointment regarding the U.S. government's involvement - or lack thereof. The only time the U.S. spoke up during discussions was to contribute information on the two aboriginal subsistence hunts by the Makah tribe of Washington State (gray whales) and the Alaskan Eskimos (bowhead whales). Other than that, the U.S. remained remarkably quiet and did not comment on the various papers presented by other conservation-minded governments.

Nancy Azzam and Heather Rockwell the first morning
of Plenary at IWC/58/St. Kitts

As a member of the U.S. delegation, I was able to attend the meeting of the Finance and Administration Committee (F&A). This meeting is closed to NGOs and other observers, due to deliberations involving money and sensitive administrative matters. Both the NGO Code of Conduct and NGO participation in Annual Meetings was on the agenda for discussion by the F&A Committee. These two items were very important to the conservation NGOs, as some pro-whaling nations have voiced their discontent over NGO behavior and attendance at the IWC Annual Meeting. I must say that the U.S. delegation, led by John and Roger, really stepped up to the plate and was very involved in the exchanges on NGO issues. I sat at the table with the delegation and was included in the discussions. A small group of countries, led by Australia and including the U.S., New Zealand, Monaco, Austria and the Netherlands, agreed to work on the proposal for NGO Participation and Accreditation to be presented to the full Commission at Plenary. At a separate morning meeting, John and I worked with these other countries to draw up the NGO Accreditation document, which will lead the way for NGO accreditation and participation in the IWC to be transparent and fair for all NGOs.

Finally, on June 16th, the morning of the opening of the Plenary session for IWC/58/St. Kitts had arrived. Like most other days on this tropical island, it was hot, humid and sunny. Tension was in the air of the large ballroom where the meeting was set to begin. The question on the minds of everyone - did Japan, Iceland and Norway have the simple majority needed to disrupt the meeting and to start pushing through their whaling agenda?

At the front of the room, the meeting was chaired for the final time by Henrik Fischer, with the IWC Secretariat, Dr. Nicky Grandy, by his side. One of the first announcements to be made was that Bill Hogarth, the U.S. Commissioner, had been appointed Vice Chair of this meeting. This decision has been made during the previous day's private Commissioner's-only meeting.

Flags from some of the 70 member nations of the IWC.
Photo by Heather Rockwell.

The Secretariat announced that there were now 70 contracting parties to the International Convention on the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW). Of these 70 member nations, four were new, and five had still not paid their dues and did not have voting rights. The four new countries were Israel, Mali, Cambodia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands. As far as the conservation NGOs were concerned, Israel appeared to be the only friendly face for whales among this incoming group. The five countries with dues in arrears were Costa Rica, Kenya, Peru, Gambia and Togo. Unfortunately, the whale-friendly countries of Costa Rica, Kenya and Peru did not get any help from the conservation-minded nations in paying up their dues. However, rumors were circulating that Gambia and Togo were in St. Kitts and were working to have their voting rights reinstated (with a little financial help from their Japanese friends).

As expected, the fireworks began almost immediately. Japan asked the Commission, as they have for the past several years, to delete the discussions of Small Cetaceans from the Annual Meeting's Agenda. After lively debate from both sides, a vote was taken. This was the crucial first vote of Plenary that would set the tone for the rest of the meeting. Luckily, by a vote of 30 for the deletion (pro-whalers - Japan, Norway, Iceland, the six Caribbean nations, and numerous West African and Pacific island nations), 32 against (conservation-minded - U.S., U.K., Australia, New Zealand, most European countries and all of the South American nations) and 1 abstention (Denmark), the issue of Small Cetaceans remained on the Agenda and Japan had lost the crucial first vote of the meeting. Score one for the whales!

Next up, Japan and their pro-whaling allies called for the use of secret ballots for voting. They argued that physical threats, strange phone calls and other tactics were being used by larger nations to intimidate small, developing countries, who do not feel safe voting in the current open and transparent manner at the Commission. Secret ballots would allow these countries to hide their votes from the public, whom they represent, and the media. The vote was taken - 30 for the use of secret ballots (pro-whalers), 33 against (conservation-minded and Denmark) and 1 surprise abstention from the Solomon Islands, who had just voted with Japan on Small Cetaceans. It should be noted that by the time this vote was taken, Gambia's voting rights had been reinstated and they voted with Japan on secret ballots. This was yet another significant defeat for Japan and its allies.

Tables showing the placards for some of the small,
developing nations brought into the IWC by Japan -
including Cameroon, Senegal, Togo, Mali, Morocco, Mauritania.
Photo by Heather Rockwell.

The second day of Plenary brought more losses for Japan. The Japanese once again put forth two proposals to the Commission requesting approval to take hundreds of minke and Bryde's whales under the guise of "small-type coastal whaling" to alleviate economic woes among several coastal Japanese villages. As these were proposed amendments to the ICRW Schedule, a 3/4 majority vote was needed by Japan. A vote was taken on the first "small-type coastal whaling" proposal to take 150 minke whales over the next three years. Thirty countries voted with Japan in favor of the proposal (including Denmark and the newly paid up nation of Togo), 31 countries voted against, and 4 abstained from the vote (China, Kiribati, Republic of Korea and the Solomon Islands {maybe the Commissioner from the Solomon Islands was finally getting the message from his government back home}). The proposal failed and Japan quickly withdrew their second proposal to take 150 Bryde's whales.

Under the issue of Sanctuaries, Japan proposed once again to abolish the Southern Ocean Sanctuary from the ICRW Schedule. Despite the differing views many countries have about sanctuaries, Japan was thwarted in its efforts again by a vote of 33 against the proposal (conservation-minded), 28 for the proposed deletion (pro-whalers) and 4 abstentions (including Tuvalu, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Morocco and Republic of Korea). Japan needed a 3/4 majority of the vote to delete the Southern Ocean Sanctuary language from the Schedule - and they were not even able to muster a simple majority of the votes.

By the third day of Plenary, those of us on the anti-whaling side were feeling fairly confident about maintaining the simple majority of votes for the rest of the meeting. How quickly things can change. A proposal was put forth by the pro-whaling nations called the St. Kitts Declaration. In the controversial proposal, St. Kitts and their whaling allies claimed that whales were consuming too much fish (a food security issue), condemned the actions of NGOs (pro-whaling nations feel threatened by NGOs), and urged the Commission to "normalize" and resume commercial whaling (or the Commission would collapse). Conservation-minded nations voiced their displeasure over the contentious language used in the initial proposal and objected loudly to the revised version. However, St. Kitts and Japan, sensing that they had the majority of votes needed to pass the Declaration, called for a vote. With 33 member nations voting for the Declaration (pro-whalers and a surprise vote from Denmark), 32 against and 1 abstention (China), Japan and the whalers finally had their first victory. However, for as much as was made about the St. Kitts Declaration by the international press, it is essentially a nonbinding resolution that does not allow for the resumption of commercial whaling now or in the near future.

The final days of the Plenary session proved to be quite lively. A group of Greenpeace activists came ashore from their boat on to the beach in front of the Marriot Hotel, where the Annual Meeting was held. The peaceful protesters were intercepted by the local police unit - toting machine guns. Ten Greenpeacers were arrested, including one U.S. citizen, and put in jail in the capital of Basseterre. As soon as the U.S. delegation was made aware of the situation, they moved quickly to make sure that she was safe and treated fairly. Fortunately, all of the activists were released after one night in jail.

The government of St. Kitts decided to put forth a resolution requesting about $500,000 in funds from the Commission to cover additional meeting expenses. This was a most unusual request and the Commissioner of St. Kitts asked that it be put to a vote. The vote was 30 for the proposal (all Caribbean islands and the pro-whalers), 30 against, and 4 abstentions (Denmark, India, Kiribati and Morocco). If a resolution is tied, it fails - and St. Kitts did not get the money. One notable absence during the vote was the nation of Cote d'Ivoire, which given their pro-whaling voting record, would have pushed the vote in St. Kitts' favor. The Commissioner from Cote d'Ivoire came running into the room after the vote was taken and tried to get his vote recorded, but it was too late for him and St. Kitts.

One of the final orders of business before the Commission was the election of Chair and Vice Chair for the next three Annual Meetings of the IWC. Bill Hogarth, the U.S. Commissioner, and Minoru Morimoto, the Japanese Commissioner, were nominated and accepted as Chair and Vice Chair, respectively. With Dr. Hogarth assuming his Chair role next year at IWC/59 in Anchorage, Alaska, the position of U.S. Commissioner will fall to Doug DeMaster.

Although Japan was expected to have the simple majority this year with the votes of all the small, developing nations they shower with overseas development aide money, they still were not able to muster the votes necessary to further their whaling agenda. The bloc of small West African, Caribbean and Pacific nations voting against the whales with Japan, Iceland and Norway continues to grow every year. This is a disturbing trend that needs to be addressed by the conservation-minded countries. Despite this bloc of votes, the pro-whaling nations are still far from the 75 percent majority they need to overturn the moratorium on commercial whaling. They were not successful in their bid to remove items from the Agenda. The proceedings of the IWC remained transparent and open for all to see. The Southern Ocean Sanctuary remained intact, although Japan continues to conduct their expanded, lethal scientific whaling in these "protected" waters. The Conservation Committee continues to work on critical cetacean issues such as pollution, by-catch and ship strikes. And, Japan's bid to expand their take of whales under the guise of "small-type coastal whaling" was soundly defeated, again.

Looking ahead to the 2007 IWC Annual Meeting in Anchorage, the main focus for the U.S. government will be their bid to secure the bowhead quota for the Alaskan Eskimos. What lengths the U.S. will go to for this quota and at what cost to the world's whales remains to be seen. In St. Kitts, the U.S. was instrumental in forming a united "native" front between the Alaskan Eskimos and Makah Indians from the U.S. and the aboriginal subsistence hunters from the Russian Federation and Greenland. More time and effort was spent by the U.S. on the aboriginal subsistence issue than any other issue. The conservation and animal welfare NGOs would like to know why the U.S. government allocates so many resources to the aboriginal hunters and so few resources and so little time to the NGOs, who represent hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S. and around the world, working to save whales. We'll see what happens next May in Alaska.

	Ric O'Barry of One Voice, France, simply walked silently into the IWC Plenary meeting and around the Delegation tables, one of the best examples of peaceful protest we've seen in a long time. Ric had a TV panel on his chest and back, playing a loop video of the Japanese dolphin drive slaughters. He continued to walk silently out of the totally surprised room, followed by a trail of media who gathered around him outside while the St. Kitts police fumed. He brought that issue worldwide attention, and the police hustled him out of the country after dark. Thanks, Ric!
Artisanal Fisheries Development is Japan's subtle and altruistic effort to help St. Kitts and Nevis, and of course has nothing to do with the IWC vote-buying controversy issues or regional efforts to establish "scientific whaling". This picture is worth far more than a thousand words.
	Photos by Deb Adams, CSI Board of Directors