plasticwrap

It's not that either is or isn't barbaric. There's an international moratorium on whale hunting/killing which the Japanese are breaking. The whales they're killing for supposed research are ending up for sale in marketplaces.

The whole world can't expect to dictate to other nations in international waters. The point I'm making, I guess, is that I have heard a lot of radio chatter about it, and 'barbaric' is the word I hear most often - there is an emotional reaction to whales quite different to the reaction people have to sharks (I guess 'cos whales don't tend to kill swimmers)

And then the local radio station segues from 'barbaric whale slaughter' on the hourly news to 'shark n taties for a friday lunchtime' promotion.

"The whole world can't expect to dictate to other nations in international waters."

I think the fact that they are international waters doesn't necessarily mean that what's in there is free for anyone to do with what they want.

Surely it's for all the nations to decide together a protocol for fishing in international waters, and Japan and Norway have been seriously outvoted as to whether whaling is acceptable.

I don't know if there shouldn't be some places on earth that are not ruled by simple majority opinion. Places where you can do what the hell you like. Just because the majority of nations think one way doesn't mean that everyone should kowtow to that.

Whaling is traditional in some cultures - and just because the white man decimated the world whale population a hundred years ago doesn't mean that the Japanese should have to stop now.

Anyway, my point is that whales have been invested with an emotional load in the western world that perhaps seems a bit odd when considered in relation to other creatures subjected to similar treatment. A shark kills a scuba diver, so the shark is hunted down and killed. A whale sinks a yacht, and we worry about its emotional wellbeing.

Anyway. I wouldn't eat whale, but then again, I don't eat shark either. Nor do I eat other fish obtained by trawling or drift-nets. The whole sea culture is out of whack.

But I still stand by my original point - we get upset over whales more than sharks, and yet the reasoning for it seems to be legalistic at best.

And also... one could argue that it is likely *healthier* to eat a creature that has fed entirely on plankton all its life than a creature that has fed on carrion, fish, mammals and garbage indiscriminately.

I'd rather eat a cow or a chicken than a dog or a weasel.

"I don't know if there shouldn't be some places on earth that are not ruled by simple majority opinion. Places where you can do what the hell you like."

Really not too keen on this idea Phreq... Maybe if every bit of the world existed in isolation to the rest, but they don't. What happens in one place affects what happens in another. And it's not like the sea is some endless, bountiful supply, or that Japan doesn't have other traditional food sources that are less endangered, or that other cultures havn't had to cut back on historical foods due to the species becoming threatened (some NZ birds and shellfish probably spring to mind). Claiming 'tradition' seems ridiculous given the massively changing diets of people in the world. If you're allowed to eat an endangered species simply because it's traditional, why not also restrict people from eating things that *aren't* traditional, since clearly that tradition is the overwhelming factor in choosing a diet?

I guess the reason the majority get upset over whales rather than sharks is the difference in media portrayal. It seems like several times a year there are 60/20 'reports' on shark attacks, survivals, nature films that focus on sharks as scary things... whereas you can buy CDs of whale song to meditate to. I'd rather not buy shark. In fact I've been avoiding anything that's not high up in the amber list on the handy wallet-size card listing the status of various fisheries that Jenni got me last year. I'm not a vegetarian, it's true, but I try to lean more toward the ethical than away from it in my food choices (free range eggs or no eggs at all, skipjack rather than yellowfin tuna - it's not much, but it's something).

I guess whales over sharks is an ingrained, manufactured, cultural thing. Probably like dogs over pigs - I shouldn't think most people get how bright and charming pigs can be, but dogs are clearly fuzzy and adorable and 'man's best friend' and shouldn't be harmed.

I do worry a bit about the whole world dictating to other people about what they should do. I mean, USA has many nukes, but will physically attack other countries for trying to have them. New Zealand fisheries are in a mess, despite what the industry tries to say, but we have a fit over other countries mismanaging theirs.

I don't agree with whaling, and I don't agree with nukes, but I ALSO don't agree with hypocracy. A large part of NZ's economy was built on the whaling industry. Orca used to team up with ships here and accompany sailors to the killing grounds to get the spare bits. WE created the problem. And now no-one can have any whales because WE have decided we like them. I mean, they are just large mammals. Sea-cows, if you will.

SAVE THE SEA-COWS!

I think that the high seas should be a place apart from most laws. There's got to be some frontiers left. Where else, apart from Holland, could I fight a duel while simultaneously smoking a joint and driving while drunk?

Hee :) Now I have an image of you steering a speedboat with one hand, a flintlock pistol in the other, wearing a pirate hat and occasionally holding fire to take a swig from a large bottle of something toxic (I'm assuming the joint was beforehand, and is why that seemed like a good idea :-D ).

Yep, hypocrisy is aggravating, but as a means to an end I'll settle for it. And if a country that *once* based a lot of it's economy on whaling can't say nope, actually, this is unsustainable and cruel - who can? Also, this is a hazy memory so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that some of the smaller nations *supporting* whaling are doing so out of very little involvement with the actual issue at hand, and rather more to do with direct or potential aid or trade from Japan.

Where did you get that photo?! ;)

Yeah, it's all politics. It's funny too, because Japan prides itself on having very strict food standards, yet whale meat has been shown to contain large amounts of heavy metals and other toxins. Apparently, it's a bit of a stiff call to get younger Japanese to eat it, since it tends to be a food older people remember from before WWII. But the government is promoting it quite heavily.

I actually can't work out why Japan wants to kill whales. It seems a hell of a lot of work and expense and international bullshit to go through to just get a few tonnes of contaminated, fatty meat.

Then there's the mercury in tuna too...

I think it's something to do with the plankton food source being contaminated?

Heres a thought. Everyone gets there own EEZ to fish in and international waters are left free. I have no idea if this is economically viable but it gives me warm fuzzies that there is one part of the earth that we dont screw over on a daily basis.

We would need to sort out the landlocked contries but Im sure we could come up with something.

As for majority rules, I think I would prefer to be a slave to a benevolent dictator. Someone that thought Nukes were a bad thing, rainforests were a good thing, sustainable resource management were a good thing and individual rights were things to respect.

Anyone want to apply?

The trouble with benevolent dictators is that they start off benevolent and end up malevolent. Something about "power corrupts, etc etc etc".

Also, how do you have an absolute dictator that controls everything you do but also respects individual rights?

I never said it was an easy solution. But I assume a benevolent dictator would be such a rare individual that she would work it out.:)

Anytime you want to start referring to me as 'Dear Leader', feel free... ;)

I'd eat lions if they weren't:
1. endangered
2. being carnivorous, likely to taste like shit
3. highly intelligent, like all cats

As an omnivore, I believe it to be more humane to eat hunted than farmed animals on the grounds that a hunted animal has one bad day (when it gets chased and killed) while a farmed animal has a generally bad lifetime (living in it's own poo for years).

Well, lions aren't endangered in all areas. In some game preserves, they have to cull them. But I agree about the probable taste...

The hunting/farming thing gets to me too. I understand the rationale, but - if it's individuals going out and hunting their own food, that's one thing, but the population of the world is so large now, and the wild populations of many food species are so small, that farming is the only sustainable way to ensure food supply.

It's like the hunter-gatherer lifestyle, it *used* to work when human population was small and impact on food supplies was less. But now, with billions of humans ravaging the face of the earth, farming seems to be the only way to go.