|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Jul 26, 2011 22:16:36 GMT -5
Sorry Shane. I guess I let my emotions interfere with my argument.
That being said, I have about as much love for them as I have for Al Qaeda (NOT SAYING THAT THEY ARE THE SAME), so I guess I'm inherently biased here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Jul 26, 2011 22:19:27 GMT -5
I will not be happy until I see the whalers get slapped with the book too within the next 3 years after this. Yes, Sea Shepherd has extreme tactics. Yes, it's surprising I support their mission. But you know what? I agree with the basic creed. That the whale's life is important too. You want to research whale anatomy? Fine. But killing 100+ of them is not research. You like how whale meat tastes? Fine. But the whales need to have their population supported. we humans seem to enjoy hunting other creatures to the brink of extinction and even to extinction. And they are. Taking less than .1% of the Minke population won't hurt it, as the Japanese are recording. Hell, their quota wouldn't even be as high if not for Watson harassing them. They increased it since Watson got involved to allow them to replace catch lost due to his group interfering. Japan has killed 8,201 minke whales in the Antarctic for “scientific purposes” since the moratorium in 1986. A total of 840 whales were killed by Japan under special permit during the 31 years before the moratorium. Japan took a total of 866 whales in 2006/07 season: 508 Southern Hemisphere minke whales, 197 North Pacific minke whales, 51 North Pacific Brydes whales, 101 North Pacific sei whales, The 2005/06 season was the first time Japan had taken fin whales, an endangered species.Japan have previously announced that in the 2007-08 they will increase their take of fin whales to 50, and also take 50 humpback whales as part of their “scientific whaling” programme. Source: wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/cetaceans/threats/whaling/whaling_facts/Somehow we're missing records from 08, 09, and 10 (i'll give leeway on this year as it isn't over). Why do you need 8,000+ whales for 'scientific purposes'? Surely you can get away with a population of 50 or so for 'scientific purposes'. I mean hell, they just said they could with their fin whales (Endangered) and humpbacks (protected). iwcoffice.org/conservation/estimate.htm IWC's population estimates are just as incomplete for a period of 3-4 years (even longer for some whales) Where are these estimates? If someone has different sources that are reliable I'd be glad to take a look if they're much more up to date than WWF's and IWC's. |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Jul 26, 2011 22:24:07 GMT -5
Because they lie about it actually being used for food. Usually they will use just the fins (for whale fin soup) and maybe (BIG MAYBE) blubber for the candles and stuff and whatever you use blubber for. Everything else goes to waste. Hell, I've heard accounts of them trapping the whales and stuff then slicing off their fins before 'letting them go' to die. No actually, whatever meat is fit for human consumption is sold for that purpose and everything else that's remotely edible is used to make pet food. It's a commercial operation, they're not going to waste any part of the whale they can sell. Also, as was mentioned already, you're thinking of shark fin soup. The fact of the matter is, they are using silly excuses for why they're hunting these creatures. Also, as for why we shouldn't care because they aren't humans... we need whales. We need the ecosystem to be balanced as much as possible. I didn't ask why should we care about whales, I asked how is harvesting the meat a "silly excuse" when you used the exact same argument to justify deer hunting. As for the ecosystem, well, that's what sustainable practises are for. |
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Jul 26, 2011 22:24:09 GMT -5
And they are. Taking less than .1% of the Minke population won't hurt it, as the Japanese are recording. Hell, their quota wouldn't even be as high if not for Watson harassing them. They increased it since Watson got involved to allow them to replace catch lost due to his group interfering. Japan has killed 8,201 minke whales in the Antarctic for “scientific purposes” since the moratorium in 1986. A total of 840 whales were killed by Japan under special permit during the 31 years before the moratorium. Japan took a total of 866 whales in 2006/07 season: 508 Southern Hemisphere minke whales, 197 North Pacific minke whales, 51 North Pacific Brydes whales, 101 North Pacific sei whales, The 2005/06 season was the first time Japan had taken fin whales, an endangered species.Japan have previously announced that in the 2007-08 they will increase their take of fin whales to 50, and also take 50 humpback whales as part of their “scientific whaling” programme. Source: wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/cetaceans/threats/whaling/whaling_facts/Somehow we're missing records from 08, 09, and 10 (i'll give leeway on this year as it isn't over). Why do you need 8,000+ whales for 'scientific purposes'? Surely you can get away with a population of 50 or so for 'scientific purposes'. I mean hell, they just said they could with their fin whales (Endangered) and humpbacks (protected). iwcoffice.org/conservation/estimate.htm IWC's population estimates are just as incomplete for a period of 3-4 years (even longer for some whales) Where are these estimates? If someone has different sources that are reliable I'd be glad to take a look if they're much more up to date than WWF's and IWC's. I for one don't know. You're always welcome to go to the ICR website or contact them www.icrwhale.org/eng-index.htm |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Jul 26, 2011 22:29:43 GMT -5
Intelligence does not automatically translate to wrong to eat. My point still stands. |
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Jul 26, 2011 22:35:55 GMT -5
Japan has killed 8,201 minke whales in the Antarctic for “scientific purposes” since the moratorium in 1986. A total of 840 whales were killed by Japan under special permit during the 31 years before the moratorium. Japan took a total of 866 whales in 2006/07 season: 508 Southern Hemisphere minke whales, 197 North Pacific minke whales, 51 North Pacific Brydes whales, 101 North Pacific sei whales, The 2005/06 season was the first time Japan had taken fin whales, an endangered species.Japan have previously announced that in the 2007-08 they will increase their take of fin whales to 50, and also take 50 humpback whales as part of their “scientific whaling” programme. Source: wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/cetaceans/threats/whaling/whaling_facts/Somehow we're missing records from 08, 09, and 10 (i'll give leeway on this year as it isn't over). Why do you need 8,000+ whales for 'scientific purposes'? Surely you can get away with a population of 50 or so for 'scientific purposes'. I mean hell, they just said they could with their fin whales (Endangered) and humpbacks (protected). iwcoffice.org/conservation/estimate.htm IWC's population estimates are just as incomplete for a period of 3-4 years (even longer for some whales) Where are these estimates? If someone has different sources that are reliable I'd be glad to take a look if they're much more up to date than WWF's and IWC's. I for one don't know. You're always welcome to go to the ICR website or contact them www.icrwhale.org/eng-index.htmIt's odd. They use the same exact info from IWC. In the same exact format. Throughout the same exact years. Nothing new here. www.icrwhale.org/eng/estimates.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Jul 26, 2011 23:29:25 GMT -5
Intelligence does not automatically translate to wrong to eat. My point still stands. Um... well it is my position that it does. Inteligence and being self aware is what makes humans wrong to eat, thus it should apply to whale. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Jul 26, 2011 23:50:59 GMT -5
Oh, a borderline terrorist organization is facing difficulties.
This is my "not giving a damn" face. They damage property. Fuck them, they can deal with the consequences of their actions.
|
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Jul 27, 2011 2:01:23 GMT -5
As far as your complaining about missing numbers of certain whales for some years, you realize they don't take every whale type every year, right? And they just don't whale once a year in the antarctic, they whale elsewhere at other points of the year...oddly enough the SS and Watson never go after them then. On that point, never does Watson or the SS chase after Norway or Greenland either. As to what I assume was your question, I'm not a scientist, I'm not sure how one comes about the numbers to take adequate tests. Myself, I'd say it was a certain size of the population. .1% of the Minke (670,000) population will be way more than a .1% take of Fin whales (46,000) due to the amount of whales in existence. Something else to add into this, the Japanese have no issue stating they take samples and want to develop sustainable whaling. I have no idea what your point is about 8000 whales over a what, 25 year period. |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Jul 27, 2011 2:40:53 GMT -5
Intelligence does not automatically translate to wrong to eat. My point still stands. Um... well it is my position that it does. Inteligence and being self aware is what makes humans wrong to eat, thus it should apply to whale. I thought it was simply the fact that eating each other makes for a rather unpleasant society. |
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Jul 27, 2011 3:05:36 GMT -5
As far as your complaining about missing numbers of certain whales for some years, you realize they don't take every whale type every year, right? And they just don't whale once a year in the antarctic, they whale elsewhere at other points of the year...oddly enough the SS and Watson never go after them then. On that point, never does Watson or the SS chase after Norway or Greenland either. As to what I assume was your question, I'm not a scientist, I'm not sure how one comes about the numbers to take adequate tests. Myself, I'd say it was a certain size of the population. .1% of the Minke (670,000) population will be way more than a .1% take of Fin whales (46,000) due to the amount of whales in existence. Something else to add into this, the Japanese have no issue stating they take samples and want to develop sustainable whaling. I have no idea what your point is about 8000 whales over a what, 25 year period. Well, considering it's the years the Sea Shepherd has been actively broadcasting I think it would be prudent to show the numbers so that everyone can know without a shadow of a doubt who is in the right. 8000 whales over a 'what, 25 year period' seems excessive. Whales don't have itty bitty life spans like rats and mice. If you're going to study them 'FOR SCIENCE!' it's prudent you don't go through them like a 2 dollar whore goes through underwear in a week. But hell if I know what they do with all of these whales (endangered and protected or otherwise). I can only see the numbers that seem too large to me. And I would REALLY like to see the numbers for the time the Sea Shepherd has been active. Nobody wants to pony up these numbers. I just want to see them and whether they've stayed steady over the years or gotten suddenly higher or even dropped. If it were me, I'd capture some whales alive and well, breed them and then use them for my tests. |
|
|
|
Post by malicious_bloke on Jul 27, 2011 3:14:04 GMT -5
Intelligence does not automatically translate to wrong to eat. My point still stands. Um... well it is my position that it does. Inteligence and being self aware is what makes humans wrong to eat, thus it should apply to whale. Not really. CJD is what makes humans wrong to eat. But fuck it, if I was hungry enough I'd find the least objectionable specimen of humanity nearby and make steak out of them, no trouble. You aren't self-aware by the time you enter my stomach |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Jul 27, 2011 3:30:57 GMT -5
8000 whales over a 'what, 25 year period' seems excessive. Whales don't have itty bitty life spans like rats and mice. If you're going to study them 'FOR SCIENCE!' it's prudent you don't go through them like a 2 dollar whore goes through underwear in a week. Shane, 8000 over 25 years is nothing. Take a lookse here. Female Minke whales become sexually mature ate 6-7 years of age and over 80% of all females give birth each year (Wilson and Duff 1999). Assume a 50:50 split in sex and that means the potential Minke population grows by 40% each year. Assuming Dasfuch's claim of a total Minke population of 670000 is correct means that there's a potential growth of around 268000 per year. Seriously, 8000 is nothing. In fact, you could both quadruple it to 32000 and take it over just one year and it would still be more than sustainable. In fact, even if you only hunted female whales the inflated quota would be easily sustainable. If it were me, I'd capture some whales alive and well, breed them and then use them for my tests. I take it you're not too familiar with a whale's breeding cycle... |
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Jul 27, 2011 3:39:21 GMT -5
It just seems really excessive even if it doesn't put a huge dent in their population. I mean we do research on humans with smaller numbers overall in the same amount of testing time. What's happening to the whales for such high turnover rates ?
Also, which whale's breeding cycle? I know humpbacks take a year of gestation. Humpbacks take 1-2 years off of breeding. They are said to live 50-60 years with one of the oldest being over 200 years old.
|
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Jul 27, 2011 3:47:19 GMT -5
It just seems really excessive even if it doesn't put a huge dent in their population. I mean we do research on humans with smaller numbers overall in the same amount of testing time. What's happening to the whales for such high turnover rates? That would be because it's not research, it's commercial whaling rather poorly disguised as research. Political bullshit is bullshit, basically. Also, which whale's breeding cycle? I know humpbacks take a year of gestation. Humpbacks take 1-2 years off of breeding. They are said to live 50-60 years with one of the oldest being over 200 years old. I was referring to the geography of the matter. Whale calves aren't born with nearly enough blubber to be able to survive in Antarctic waters, so the whales will migrate north to warmer water to give birth and swim back with the calves while they fatten up during the journey. All I can say is good luck emulating that in captivity. |
|
