Intro How do would you feel if your brother and you do did same bad thing but only you will bewere punished? If only your brother is allowed to do things which you are not allowed to, what would you say? You will would probably say, ‘why only me? How come he doesn’t get punished? Why I cannotWhy can I not do this? It’s not fair!’ ‘People are equal,’ you say, but even though we know we should be, it still is not easy to treat people equally in reality.
Thesis whaling is one of the biggest international debates. Norway, Iceland, and Japan are famous for being pro-whaling countrycountries. Japan, however, is the only target of the thundering criticism, while International Whaling Commission (IWC) officially allows Japan to do whaling for research. The criticism which anti-whaling countries such as America argue offer sounds very racial and political. racially and politically.(You either need nouns here, like “racial and political”, or you could say “racially and politically motivated”). Thus Japan does not have to stop whaling, as Japan follows the necessary procedures.
History Whaling for subsistence dates to prehistoric times. The early people of Norway began whaling at least 4,000 years ago. Various peoples of the north western North American coast and the Arctic have a long tradition of whaling. Whaling, done from canoes or skin boats, often when migrating pods of whales passed nearby, was a very dangerous undertaking.
Norway The hunting of whales is thought to have been pursued by the Basques from land as early as the 10th century and in Newfoundland waters by the 14th century. It is not until the middle of the 16th century, however, that the appearance of Basques in those waters is established by record. Whaling on a large scale was first organized at Spitsbergen at the beginning of the 17th century, largely by the Dutch who, with the Basques, apparently developed methods of flensing and boiling. The Dutch were at first in competition with the English Muscovy Company of London and they established the port of Smeerenberg. Large profits continued only until 1640, when the scarcity of whales forced the Dutch farther out into the northern waters in search of them. (Excellent, Take)
America By the middle of the 17th century whaling from the land was established in America. The earliest type, called drift whaling, consisted of harvesting whales that had washed up on the shore, mainly after storms. Drift whaling became economically important in Colonial America, and the first laws regarding it were written at Southampton, Long Island, in the 1640s. This practice was followed by shore whaling, in which whales swimming close to shore were hunted. With the capture of a sperm whale by a Nantucket whaler, the superior qualities of sperm oil were discovered, and American whalers began fishing farther south in search of the sperm whale, which superseded the right whale in value.
American fisheries were set back by the American Revolution, but in 1791 the first Americans rounded Cape Horn to hunt in the S Pacific. Another, but temporary, temporary setback occurred in the War of 1812, but the outcome spelled the complete defeat of British whaling. From 1815 until shortly before the Civil War, the period widely known as the golden age of U.S. whaling, Americans sailed the Pacific from south to north, on voyages often lasting as long as three or four years, in search of whales. The advent of the Civil War, a decrease in the demand for sperm oil and in the number of whales, and the discovery of oil in Pennsylvania brought on the decline of the industry.
Modern The invention (1856), by the Norwegian Sven Foyn, of a harpoon containing an explosive head may be said to have inaugurated modern whaling. Besides insuring the whale's immediate death this type of harpoon was subsequently modified to shoot compressed air into the whale so that it will not sink before it can be secured. The development of the factory ship, equipped to take on board and completely process whales caught by smaller chaser boats, increased safety and enhanced the ability to catch the larger blue whale. It also allowed for the use of all parts of the whale; formerly only the blubber and head could be procured, and the job of flensing from the side of the ship was a hazardous one.
Attempts at Regulation and Protection
In 1932-33, partly in response to the collapse of the whale-oil market, the first attempts were made to regulate and restrict the catch by international agreement. After World War II the International Whaling Commission (IWC) was formed in Washington, D.C., by 17 nations. The commission, which regulates most of the world's whaling activity, began in the 1960s to limit the number and species of whales that could be hunted.
In the subsequent years, environmental activist groups, notably Greenpeace, became extremely involved in the attempt to stop whaling, and in 1982 the IWC voted a moratorium on commercial whaling. Exceptions to the moratorium generally have been made for native peoples, such as the Makah, who traditionally had hunted whales and used their meat as a major part of their diet. These regulations are not adhered to by all nations, including some members of the commission, and whales continue to be hunted by Norway and Iceland and, for research purposes, by Japan. (The killing of whales for research, while permitted under IWC regulations, is opposed by many as unnecessary, and opponents of whaling believe it has been abused and should be abolished.)
Anti-whaling As whales should be protected from extinction, there are also several reasons that anti-whaling countries support. They believe that no animal should suffer and die for the benefit of humans and also that the hunting and the killing animals likely sharing many social and intellectual abilities with humans are immoral. Whales are so special; they are exceptionally intelligent and social beings, able to communicate fluently with each other. In addition, they insist that whaling is inherently cruel. Before the whale is harpooned, it is usually exhausted by a long and stressful chase. Because whales are moving targets, a makrsman can achieve a direct hit only with great difficulty. The explosive-tipped harpoon wounds many whales, who often survive for some time before finally being killed by rifle shots or by additional harpoons. Even when a direct hit is scored, the explosive often fails to detonate.
Counterargument in general whaling
Though these claims, morally and emotionally, make us feel whaling should be banned, these claims do not have strong evidences to convince pro-whaling countries effectively. First of all, though whales have a special intelligence compared to other animal, whales also should be treated in the same way as other animals, as a resource to be used for food and other products. In addition, scientific research revealed the intelligence of dolphin, not whales; these studies, however, cannot measure intelligence in any useful way. Also considering chicken, pork, cow, lamb and other animals we eat, the anti-whaling countries, mainly western countries, cannot say that no animal should suffer and die for the benefit of humans. If their claim is true, those animals which we eat in our daily life also should not be sold as a food.
Killing whales certainly takes a long time and seems to be cruel. Other animals, however, are treated much more cruelly. Whales will be hunted after they live freely in the ocean, on the other hand, other animals are not allowed to live like whales; they born and live to be a ‘good’ meat from the beginning and spend their whole life in a cage. The process of killing whales might take longer than other animals because of its size, but the process of killing other animals is not different from killing whales. People do not know how other animals are killed to be a meat, while they know how whales are killed because mass media put so much emphasis on whaling.
Whales should not be hunted to extinction, but if their numbers are healthy, then hunting them should be permitted. Whale populations are healthy, particularly those of minke whales, which now number over a million. A resumption of hunting under regulation will not adversely affect their survival. The IWC did not impose the ban on whaling for moral reasons but to prevent extinction. Numbers have now greatly increased; the ban has served its original purpose. This, however, causes another problem. Whales damage the fish stocks on which many people depend for their food and livelihood. Culling whales will reduce the decline in fish stocks. That might not affect most of western countries, but countries such as Japan where people enjoy eating fish daily are affected.
Anti-whaling countries support their moral reasons toward whaling, but those moral reasons will hardly affect pro-whaling countries because of its necessity in whaling culture.
As we have looked through debates in general, Japan is the only country which has been strongly criticized on their whaling for research purpose while Norway and Iceland are allowed to do whaling for commercial because of their tradition. There are thousands of articles or images against Japan, while only a few of them against Norway and Iceland. Why do these anti-whaling countries attack only Japan? This might have something with race. How do anti-whaling countries with moral reasons blame Japan racially?
In fact, whaling in Japan has a long history; it started at least 3 century BC (3rd century AD? 3rd Century BC? 3 Centuries ago?). Whale meat were was eaten or used as a special gift through centuries, not only using whale oil. A number of recipes or traditional souvenirs using whale in Japan describes how important whaling is in Japan. Japan used a traditional way of whaling until America came to Japan and introduced modern whaling in late 19th century. Interestingly, the important reason America first visited Japan relates to whaling. America wanted to use Japan as a relay point of for their whaling in order to get good quality of whale oil. Whale oil was relatively important before it was substituted for oil or vegetable oil. In addition, America strongly supported whaling or and Japanese eating whalesthe consumption of whales by the Japanese after world war two because of its high protein to improve Japanese food situationwhales are high in protein and could improve Japan’s food situation. Thus whaling is strongly related Japanese culture as well as Norway.
Japan does not have any permission of whaling for commercialfor commercial whaling, although IWC accepts whaling for commercial for those countries where whaling is their tradition. Japanese food culture or and traditional souvenirs are certainly damaged by the ban of whaling. Thus ban on whaling Therefore, while the ban on whaling protects whales, but at the same time it also declines destroys one part of Japanese culture. Even though we have seen how important whaling is in Japan, it will be very difficult for Japan to have permission for commercial whaling.
Not only does anti-whaling affects Japanese food culture or and tradition, non government organization or and anti whaling groups such as Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd also physically attack Japanese boats and prevent whaling radically. For example, Sea the shipShepherd’s ship crews (which ship??) pursued and delivered 10 bottles of rotten butter and 15 bottles of a methyl cellulose and indelible dye mixture to Japanese ship on February, 2008.(who was it delivered to?). They also crashed Japanese research ships several times to interrupt whaling, even though there was no serious damage to either ship. In addition, two Sea Shepherd activists boarded a Japanese whaling vessel without permission. These pirate actions terrify Japanese fishermen and researchers. On TV Yyou may see sometimes on TVsometimes see Japanese ships flashing splashing water toward these activists, but it results in protectingthis is to protect themselves from these pirate actions. and massMass media only shows the this part to support anti-whaling. These Japanese ships always cannotcan never finish their missions without having any damage or threat. Humans should not be harmed with for any reason to protect whales. If these activity would be acceptedIf you claimed that this was acceptable, you would have to doubt what is morally wrong; to harm human beings in order to keep whaling or to killing whales to use as a resource for human beings.
Notably, any other whaling countries do not likelyno other whaling countries get interrupted like Japan does, while their Japan’s commercial whaling is for commercial which havehas been prohibited. Even though Japan also has a whaling history, as it has been mentioned earlier, IWC has not permitted Japanese traditional whaling. Also Japanese whaling is under scientific research with IWC permission, but the criticism is bigger than that against Norway started commercial whaling in 1993 and Iceland did commercial whaling in 2007.
Whaling is not a simple issue. Considering these unfair treatments, this has something related to nation or politicsto do with specific nations and politics. One of the anti-whaling countries, Britain, cannot take a serious action to Norway, which who is their important business countryan important trading partner. Also America is against whalingAmerica is also against whaling, even though America is one of the whaling countriesstill practices whaling. Since Japan depends on imported food, Japan imports a lot of meat from America. While America supported whaling middle 19th century to improve Japanese food situation, if it happened now, Japan might be able to get whale meat to increase their self-sufficiency and the rate of dependency of imported food might drop off as a result. Then it would have an influence on trade market between America and Japan. In addition, there are several countries which have never done whaling in IWC. Those countries participate in IWC to raise the number of anti-whaling countries so that they can take part a majority in IWC.
Conclusion
Norway and Iceland is the countryare places where people kill whales inherently, and so doesthe same as Japan. These countries are allowed to kill whales under because of their tradition. Then why Japanese cannotcan Japanese not kill whales to preserve their food and traditional cultures as well as they do?. Those who think whaling is morally wrong prevent whaling with through immoral waymeans, as we saw in this paper. Thus Japan can continue their whaling for scientific research without being criticized and having any interruption.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/01/03/2131274.htm 1st pic
"whaling." The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2008. Encyclopedia.com. 28 Feb. 2009 .
http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=7516&pst=958791　canon
http://www.hhcc.com/?cat=32 chicken