International Whaling Commission

What is the International Whaling Commission?
The International Whaling Commission (IWC) in short
What does the IWC do?
How does it function?
The 1986 moratorium
Relevant issues and challenges facing the IWC
France’s position on...
The issue of objections and reservations
The Conservation Committee
The Sanctuaries
Do whales eat fish?
Tourist whale-watching
France’s action in relation to French-speaking countries
France’s other actions in the area of protection of marine mammals

What is the International Whaling Commission?

The International Whaling Commission (IWC) was created by the Washington Convention (1946) in a context of overexploitation of large cetaceans. Initially intended to ensure “the sound conservation of the whale species, and, consequently, making the orderly development of the whaling industry possible”, the IWC has progressively given itself the task of whale conservation.

For a few years, however, the IWC has undergone a crisis in its conservation mission, due specifically:

  to a flexible founding text, allowing its members to get around its decisions, including the most important ones, such as the moratorium on commercial whaling, which commenced in 1986 (through the right of objection - article 5 - or through the right to scientific whaling - article 8)

  as well as to Japan’s active diplomacy, aiming to expand the pro-whaling camp and to get the simple majority, currently held by the whale-protection camp, of which France is part.

The International Whaling Commission (IWC) in short

The purpose of the Whaling Convention, which was signed in Washington, D.C. in 1946, is the conservation of whales, enabling the whaling industry to develop.

The Commission (decision-making body of the convention) meets annually, currently bringing together 79 countries (as of 1 June 2008). Twenty-one European Union member states participate in this organization. The European Commission has observer status. France has been a member since the very beginning.

The Commission makes decisions at a three-quarters majority, when such decisions involve a change to convention regulations (decisions about quotas, creation of a sanctuary, etc.) and at a simple majority in other cases (recommendations, resolutions). The moratorium is a regulatory provision and therefore requires a three-quarters majority in order to be lifted.

Species concerned: large cetaceans (or whales): 13 species including baleen whales (right whales, fin whales, etc.) and the sperm whale, which is a toothed whale.

The moratorium on commercial whaling was voted on in 1982 (entering into force in 1986) and three countries objected to it: Russia, Norway, and Iceland.

Two sanctuaries, where commercial whaling would be banned in the event the moratorium is lifted: the one in the Indian Ocean, created in 1979, and the one in the Antarctic, created in 1994, on France’s initiative.

Types of whaling practiced:

  Commercial whaling under objection for Norway (since 1993) and Iceland (since last year). Altogether, since 1993, 6,000 minke whales have been killed (mainly by Norway, which currently hunts an average of 600 whales a year). Beginning in 2007, Iceland announced that it would kill ten fin whales and 30 minke whales a year.

  Aboriginal whaling, practiced by the United States (Alaska for the Greenland whale and the grey whale), Russia (Siberia for the same populations), Denmark (Greenland for the fin whale and the minke whale), Saint Vincent and the Grenadines for the humpback whale. Quotas are granted for five years and were renewed in 2007. Quotas authorized for the period 2008-2012: 620 grey whales for five years (primarily for Russia), 19 fin whales/year, 212 minke whales/year (both species for Greenland), 20 humpback whales for Saint Vincent and the Grenadines for five years.

  Scientific whaling: practiced by Japan since the moratorium came into effect and by Iceland, since its return to the IWC in 2002. Since 1986, more than 10,000 whales, all species combined, have been caught, primarily by Japan in the North Pacific and the Antarctic. The quotas announced in scientific programmes are as follows: Japan in the North Pacific: a programme began in 2000 allowing for the capture of 220 minke whales, 50 Bryde’s whales, 100 Sei whales and 10 sperm whales per year.

Japan in Antarctica: a new programme began in 2005-2006 allowing for the capture of 850 minke whales, 10 fin whales and 50 humpback whales per year. However, in 2007, Japan abandoned the idea of capturing humpback whales

Iceland: a new programme began in 2003 allowing for the capture of 100 minke whales and 50 Sei whales per year, but the quotas actually authorized were much lower.

List of IWC member countries

What does the IWC do?

In its initial missions regulating whaling, the role of the IWC is, in particular, to:

  assign whaling quotas for the different whale species and stocks;

  prescribe open and closed seasons and areas for whaling;

  prohibit the capture of calves and female whales accompanied by calves;
  provide for the complete protection of certain species (blue whale, humpback whale);
  designate vast protected areas or whale sanctuaries;

In addition, the Commission encourages, coordinates and funds whale research, publishes the results of scientific studies, and promotes research into related matters, such as humane capture methods. Similarly, the IWC’s Scientific Committee develops an “inventory” of the populations and is starting an investigation into the repercussions of climate warming and pollution on cetaceans.

How does it function?

The IWC meets annually at one of the states parties: in 2007 in the United States (Anchorage, Alaska), in 2008 in Chile (Santiago, 23-27 June 2008) and in 2009 in Portugal (Madeira).

The IWC’s decisions are prepared by committees (scientific, conservation), subcommittees (aboriginal whaling, violations) and workshops and are then made in a plenary session by consensus or at a simple majority, with each member (whaling commissioner) having one vote. A three-quarters majority is required to change the Convention and its annex.

The whaling commissioners are appointed by the member states (in general, representatives of the Departments of Fisheries, the Environment or Foreign Affairs, like in France). There is no limit to the term of their appointment.

The 1986 moratorium

In view of the threat - which emerged very early - of the extinction of certain species (the populations of most whale species have been reduced by more than 80% during the age of industrial whaling), in 1982, the International Whaling Commission temporarily banned the commercial exploitation of large cetaceans. However, whaling for scientific purposes and aboriginal subsistence whaling, practiced in Denmark (Greenland), Russia (Siberia), Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and the USA (Alaska), in accordance with specific quotas decided on at a three-quarters majority, are still allowed.

The moratorium applied beginning in 1986 and still in effect also made provision for an assessment of the impact of the measure on the cetacean populations to be drawn up starting in 1990, and for changes regarding the reinstatement of whaling quotas for certain species in the event commercial whaling starts again to be considered.

Norway and Iceland practice commercial whaling, having lodged an objection and a reservation, respectively, regarding the moratorium, as permitted by the Whaling Convention.

Relevant issues and challenges facing the IWC

The assessment process provided for by the 1986 moratorium is continuing and there are currently two approaches within the International Whaling Commission: the countries that believe that the stocks have had enough time to re-form and allow commercial whaling to start up again (pro-whaling camp), and the countries (so-called protection countries, including France, as well as the United Kingdom, Germany, South Africa, Australia, Brazil, the United States, and New Zealand, etc.), giving the precautionary principle as a reason, that stress that in the current state of science, there are still too many uncertainties about cetacean population estimates and that many threats other than whaling are compromising the restoration of the populations of the different species: pollution, marine traffic, accidental capture, climate change, etc. Radically conflicting positions have progressively tarnished the image of the IWC, perceived as a paralyzed and ineffective organization.

Since 2007, the Commission has recognized that its future was in danger if decisions were not made to improve its functioning and if the climate of discussions was not more peaceful. An intersessional meeting (Heathrow, United Kingdom, 6-9 March 2008) has made it possible to start the debate on the future and organization of the IWC, drawing inspiration from the good practices of other organizations and the experience of outside personalities. France supports this process and is sparing no efforts to help improve the IWC, the only body with global jurisdiction over the protection and management of cetaceans.

France’s position on...

· Scientific whaling

While commercial whaling has been banned since the 1986 moratorium, scientific whaling is authorized by the 1946 Washington Convention (article 8). However, this provision is out of step with today’s reality. Large-scale research programmes, as they are conducted in this day and age thanks to technological progress, were indeed not provided for by the authors of the Convention. In particular, the quotas for scientific whaling are exempt from any type of control, because they are decided on in a discretionary manner by the whaling country in accordance with IWC regulations. Finally, recent studies show that the large majority of scientific research can be carried out on live whales.

This is why France and 26 other countries lodged a protest in December 2006 with the Japanese government with regard to their new, so-called scientific whaling campaign, doubling the number of catches authorized (more than 1,400 a year, in this case) and including, for the first time, species classified as vulnerable by the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources): the humpback whale (decision suspended temporarily) and the fin whale.

France has participated in the initiatives of the whale-protection countries to remind Iceland, which also practices scientific whaling with smaller quotas, of the pointlessness of killing whales for scientific research.

· The RMS (Revised Management Scheme)

The RMS is an amendment to the annex to the Convention (thus requiring a three-quarters majority) stipulating the conditions of a possible return to commercial whaling (in the event the 1986 moratorium is lifted).

France, like all of the whale-protecting countries, believes that an RMS is acceptable only if a series of measures is planned, including the abandonment of scientific whaling, the impossibility of making objections to the RMS, the establishment of an international inspection and control system, and compliance with sanctuaries.

At the present time, pro-whaling countries and whale-protecting countries have not been able to agree on a compromise on the RMS issue. As neither of the two camps has a three-quarters majority, this key issue has been deadlocked for a few years.

The issue of objections and reservations

The Washington Convention allows member states to make objections to any decision made by the Commission, as long as this objection is lodged in time. Once the objection is made, the objecting member state is not bound by the decision at issue.

Norway, having formulated an objection to the 1986 moratorium, is one of the only countries to whale for commercial purposes since 1993 and has recently expressed its intentions to increase is whaling quotas. Japan, which has retracted its objection to the moratorium, but which has formulated an objection to the creation of marine sanctuaries, practices whaling for scientific purposes in the Antarctic.

Iceland joined the IWC again in 2002, with a reservation to the 1986 moratorium, on the basis of which it resumed commercial whaling in October 2006.

France and other whale-protecting countries want the right to make objections and reservations to be removed and come down in favour of an explicit ban of this right in the drafting of the RMS.

The Conservation Committee

While, since the 1986 moratorium, certain species have avoided extinction, other dangers are threatening cetaceans: pollution, marine traffic, undersea noise, accidental catches, climate change, etc., risks that the IWC has taken into consideration, in particular through the creation of the Conservation Committee within the IWC in 2003, through the “Berlin initiative”, which France supported, despite the opposition of pro-whaling countries.

The Sanctuaries

Strongly attached to the precautionary principle and in light of the issues of protecting cetaceans, France has worked relentlessly for 20 years to champion a conservation method through the creation of vast protected areas, or sanctuaries, where the behaviours and volumes of large cetaceans can be observed more easily. Each year, it supports the existing whale sanctuaries, including the one in the Antarctic, which was established in 1994 on France’s initiative (the second sanctuary is the one in the Indian Ocean) and backs the Australian and Brazilian draft resolutions, which call for the creation of new sanctuaries in the Southwest Pacific and the South Atlantic. Accordingly, these areas would be sheltered from commercial whaling if it were to start up again one day.

Do whales eat fish?

Some whaling countries assert that the moratorium on commercial whaling has a detrimental effect on the stocks of fish caught inasmuch as the whales were eating large quantities of fish of commercial interest (supposedly five times more than the fishing industries catch). Most developing countries are sensitive to the argument of food security, which explains to a large extent their position in the pro-whaling camp.

France and the other whale-protecting countries believe that this reasoning is baseless: many experts on the IWC’s Scientific Committee criticize this theory, which does not take into account the multiple interactions between the different species of the ecosystem and the complexity of food chains. Indeed:

  Many whales do not eat fish at all; in reality, baleen whales, the most present in the Southern hemisphere, eat krill (small shellfish), primarily.
  In addition, none of the fish eaten by whales have any commercial value. Such fish are threatened more by other predators (such as squid).
  Removing the predators that are at the top of the food chain (such as cetaceans) may cause major disturbances in the ecosystem, with harmful effects on fishing.
  The decline in the whale population compared with its pre-whaling level has not resulted in a rise in marketable fish stocks - on the contrary.
  This theory conceals the main reason for the decline in fish stocks: overexploitation by the fishing industry.

This issue was brought up during a workshop in Dakar on 8-9 May 2008: http://www.lenfestocean.org/whales_fisheries.html

Tourist whale-watching

Tourist whale-watching allows for sustainable and environmentally sound management of whale stocks while profiting much more than from whaling. According to some sources, this is one of the most dynamic tourist sectors in the world: it posts annual growth of approximately 12% and generates turnover of more than one billion dollars. In comparison, the average turnover of whaling currently stands at approximately 50 million dollars.

France supports this activity with strong tourism and economic effects, including in terms of the image of the country that promotes it, as long as it is carried out in accordance with a defined code of conduct (cf. the code of conduct for the Pelagos sanctuary for marine mammals in the Mediterranean, initiated by France, Monaco and Italy: www.sanctuaire-pelagos.org).

France’s action in relation to French-speaking countries

France recently reinforced its action in relation to French-speaking countries in view of their new membership in the whaling camp in the past few years. Indeed, before 2000, the IWC had only six French-speaking countries, while they now comprise a quarter of the IWC, with about 20 countries. Among these countries, more than half vote with Japan.

This is why France has taken several diplomatic approaches with these countries and has taken on special responsibility in terms of spreading scientific information in French on the situation of cetaceans in the world. It has taken steps, with the support of other French-speaking countries, in favour of recognizing French as a working language. In particular, in June 2006, it provided simultaneous interpreting for the first time during the plenary session of the IWC, the only official and working language of which is English for the time being, in order to facilitate the French-speaking commissioners’ understanding of debates that are sometimes technical. Starting in 2008, the plenary meetings are conducted with simultaneous interpretation (English/Spanish/French) out of the IWC’s budget and the most important documents are translated into these languages.

France’s other actions in the area of protection of marine mammals

In addition to its active participation in the IWC, France is also present in regional bodies that deal with the conservation of marine mammals, in particular through its membership in ACCOBAMS (Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans of the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea) and ASCOBANS (similar agreement for the North Sea and the Northeastern Atlantic). In 2006, it signed a memorandum of understanding for the conservation of cetaceans in the South Pacific in the context of the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS).

France is also involved in the creation of sanctuaries for marine mammals in regional seas: there are two national sanctuaries in French Polynesia and New Caledonia. France is developing a project for a sanctuary for marine mammals in the French West Indies. In the Mediterranean, France, Italy and Monaco are the originators of the Pelagos sanctuary for marine mammals. In its own exclusive economic area, its environmental code protects all marine mammals, including whales. Accordingly, France supports and is involved in all actions in favour of the protection of cetaceans.

  Consult the IWC’s website: www.iwcoffice.org

  Consult the site of the “Incroyables cétacés” exhibition (Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle): www.mnhn.fr/cetaces

Updated on 16.06.08