Another Contentious International Whaling Commission Meeting

This summer’s meeting of the International Whaling Commission was against contentious as Japan and other pro-whaling nations squared off against anti-whaling nations that saw Japan threatening to leave the organization.

Japan went to the IWC seeking approval to expand its research whaling, which is frequently criticized by environmentalists and anti-whaling nations as being little more than commercial whaling in disguise. In 2002, Japan caught 590 minke whales, 50 Byrde’s whales, 50 Sei whales and 10 sperm whales as part of its research whaling program.

Currently Japan is allowed to harvest 50 Minke whales in its coastal waters, and it sought approval to triple that quota to 150 whales. It also wanted to expand its research whaling program to include catching Byrde’s whales in the northwestern Pacific. Both proposals were turned down solid majorities of the anti-whaling countries.

The IWC did pass a non-binding resolution condemning Japan’s research whaling program and asking it to stop the practice. Japan said it would ignore the resolution.

Meanwhile, anti-whaling countries wanted to establish a new whale sanctuaries in the South Pacific and South Atlantic. Both proposals were blocked by Japan and other pro-whaling countries.

The IWC did manage to approve creation of a new conservation committee to look at ways to expand the IWC’s conservation activities. That angered Japan which threatened to withhold funding for the committee and elicited new threats from Japan to leave the IWC altogether. If it chose to do so, it would no longer be bound by IWC rules.

Japan’s chief cabinet secretary Yasuo Fukuda was quoted by the Financial Times of London as complaining that the creation of the conservation committee, “goes against the basic goals of the IWC. The issue must be approached from the viewpoint of conservation and use.”

Meanwhile, Iceland continued to move forward with plans to start its own research whaling program modeled on Japan’s program, which further threatens the continuing ban on commercial whaling.

Sources:

Hunt fails to ease frustrations. Hans Greimel, Associated Press, July 10, 2003.

IWC blocks Japan bid to triple coastal whale-hunting quota. Japan Times, June 20, 2003.

Dead porpoises disrupt Berlin whaling meeting. Reuters, June 19, 2003.

Japan helps block proposals for new whale sanctuary. Bayan Rahman and Hugh Williamson, Financial Times (London), June 18, 2003.

Saving the whale, again. Syndey Morning Herald, June 18, 2003.

Japanese whaling bid blocked. The Daily Telegraph (London), June 19, 2003.

Gov’t intends to continue ‘research whaling.’ Japan Times, June 19, 2003.

Federal Judge Rejects Fund for Animals Lawsuit Over Hunting of Threatened Animals

On July 31, 2003 U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler dismissed a lawsuit brought two years ago by the Fund for Animals aimed at stopping the importation of threatened sheep from abroad.

The case centered around Argali sheep which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service classifies as endangered in every country except Mongolia, where it is listed as threatened. Since it is listed only as threatened rather than endangered, hunters in the United States have been travelling to Mongolia to hunt the animals and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been issuing permits allowing hunters to import the carcasses of the animals they kill back into the United States.

The Fund for Animals sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service arguing that this practice was a violation of the Endangered Species Act. The lawsuit claimed that the USFWS was violating its own rules by allowing a proposed rule for dealing with the import of argali to stay in effect for a decade, and that the argali sheep should be listed as endangered rather than threatened.

As Michael Markarian said in a Fund press release in April 2002,

It is unconscionable that hundreds of animals in this imperiled species have been killed simply so wealthy American trophy hunters can add more heads to their collections. The USFWS has acted illegally and irresponsibly by granting hundreds of import permits, by not soliciting public comment, and by leaving this proposed rule in limbo while the argali population continues to decline.

If the lawsuit had been successful it could potentially have affected other international game hunts, but Judge Gladys Kessler ruled that the Fund and other plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the lawsuit. In addition Kessler ruled that even if they had standing, the Fund and other groups failed to demonstrate they would likely succeed on the merits of their case saying that the plaintiffs,

. . . failed to meet their burden of demonstrating that those choices, which can only be made by the governments of Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia and Tajikistan, have been or will be made in such a manner as to reduce the sport hunting and killing of argali.

In fact there is evidence that when the United States previously banned imports from Tajikistan, the government did not limit sport hunting, and the killing of argali continued by virtue of non-U.S> citizens and increased poaching.

Sources:

Anti-hunters dealt legal setback. New York Post, August 10, 2003.

Hunt and protect? Amanda Onion, ABCNews.Com, May 7, 2003.

SCI wins major victory for hunters. Arizona Outdoorsman, August 7, 2003.

Court Rules in Favor of Imperiled Argali Sheep. Press Release, Fund for Animals, April 4, 2002.

Michael James Scarpitti (AKA Tre Arrow) Remains Loose One Year Later

In August 2002 a Portland, Oregon grand jury indicted Michael James Scarpitti (AKA Tre Arrow) and three others for their role in a June 2001 arson attack at a logging company. Although Scarpitti was added to the FBI’s Most Wanted List in December 2002, so far Scarpitti has eluded capture.

Police in Tigard, Oregon, spent a couple hours in early August searching a wooded area near a mall after a man reported seeing Scarpitti in the area. The witness said he recognized Scarpitti from pictures in the media. The witness said Scarpitti was walking with another man, but the search was called off after two hours without finding the fugitive.

One of Scarpitti’s alleged accomplices, Jacob D.B. Sherman, plead guilty in December 2002 for his role in that and another fire, and will be sentenced in September. He is expected to receive about three-and-a-half years for the arson.

With Scarpitti on the run, Sherman apparently used the Tre-made-me-do-it defense, with The Oregonian reporting that,

Federal court papers indicate that Arrow helped mold Sherman in his likeness, radicalizing the younger man’s environmentalism. And aside from environmental beliefs, Sherman followed Arrow in adopting a vegan diet, shunning bathing and going barefoot.

Scarpitti was apparently in excellent physical health and used to spending days and even weeks at a time in trees to protest logging, so there is some speculation that he may be emulating recently captured fugitive Eric Rudolph in remaining as much as possible in wooded areas where he is less likely to be spotted.

There is a $25,000 reward for anyone who offers information leading to the capture of Scarpitti. People with such information should call their local FBI office.

Sources:

FBI still chasing Tre Arrow. Bryan Denson, The Oregonian, August 11, 2003.

New York State Senate S2375-A Canned Hunt Bill

     STATE OF NEW YORK

________________________________________________________________________

2735--A

2003-2004 Regular Sessions

IN SENATE

March 4, 2003
___________

Introduced by Sens. PADAVAN, MALTESE, TRUNZO -- read twice and ordered
printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Environ-
mental Conservation -- committee discharged, bill amended, ordered
reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee

AN ACT to amend the environmental conservation law, in relation to the
prohibition on canned shoots

The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assem-
bly, do enact as follows:

1 Section 1. Subparagraphs 3 and 4 of paragraph a of subdivision 1 of
2 section 11-1904 of the environmental conservation law, as added by chap-
3 ter 208 of the laws of 1999, are amended to read as follows:
4 (3) the shooting or spearing of a non-native big game mammal that is
5 confined in a box, pen, cage or similar container [of ten or less
6 contiguous acres] or in a fenced or other area from which there is no
7 means for such mammal to escape;
8 (4) the deliberate release of a non-native big game mammal that is
9 confined in a box, pen, cage or similar container [of ten or less
10 contiguous acres] or in a fenced or other area from which there is no
11 means for such mammal to escape in the presence of any person who is, or
12 will be, shooting or spearing such non-native big game mammal.
13 § 2. This act shall take effect on the first of November next succeed-
14 ing the date on which it shall have become a law.

How Can Meat and Vegetarian Food Markets Be Rising Simultaneously?

A few weeks ago Karen Davis sent around an e-mail promoting United Poultry Concerns’ annual conference. In the midst of the e-mail was this fascinating paragraph which really does a good job of outlining exactly how much effect the animal rights movement has had over the past quarter century (emphasis added),

Thirteen years later [after UPC’s founding] , the number of animals on US farms is 10 billion, and meat consumption is record high. Government statistics show that in 2000, Americans, per person, ate 195 pounds of red meat, poultry, and fish, 57 pounds above annual consumption in the 1950s. At the same time, “there is a proliferation of vegetarian products,” says food trend watcher Dr. Jonathan Seltzer, and a 2000 consumer report predicted the vegetarian market will grow 100 percent to 125 percent over the next five years, with vegetarian food sales topping $1.25 billion in 2001, thanks to a US vegetarian population of 7 million to 12 million people (Free Press, July 30, 2002).

Seven to twelve million might sound like a lot of vegetarians, but it is a range of only 2.7 to 4.6 percent of the U.S. population.

The size of the vegetarian food market is interesting, however I wonder just how much of that food is being sold to vegetarians vs. non-vegetarians. I know I can’t be the only person in American whose had a Boca burger and a steak in the same week. If anyone knows of any market studies that have attempted to estimate the percentage of vegetarian food sales that are made to non-vegetarians, please e-mail me at [email protected].

Source:

United Poultry Concerns’ Forum on Promoting Veganism. Press Release, Karen Davis, United Poultry Concerns, August 2003.

Vegetarian Society: Fish Is Not Vegetarian

The Publican reports that in August the UK’s Vegetarian Society began an education campaign to highlight the fact that fish is generally not considered vegetarian fare.

The campaign was to focus on restaurants and pubs. According to The Publican,

The campaign has been developed in response to reports from its members of being offered fishy meals in pubs, restaurants and even hospitals. A poll of 1,000 visitors to the society?s website found that ?significant numbers of eating establishments? considered fish to be a veggie dish.

On the other hand, surveys on both sides of the Atlantic show that quite a few self-described vegetarians do no themselves realize that fish is not vegetarian, so the restaurants and others here might simply be trying to meet the demands of those pesky pesco-vegetarians (the fact that there is a specific term for vegetarians who eat fish is, in itself, evidence that we’re dealing with some sort of post-modern version of reality here).

Source:

Fishy campaign from the Vegetarian Society. ThePublican.Com, August 6, 2003.