|
Post by keyodie on Nov 7, 2008 18:00:05 GMT -5
I don't know enough to have much of an opinion, but I hate how this trailer say "The Japanese have been coming down to Antarctica and over the years they've killed thousands of whales." Call them Japanese whale hunters, please? Ugh. It could just be me being pissy, but...
|
|
|
Post by ladytera on Nov 7, 2008 19:02:05 GMT -5
I've got to say I don't know enough either. But my first impression of the trailers I've seen is that the show is a propaganda piece for freaking Green Peace types. Thousands of whales killed, in the course of whaling history, is a drop in the bucket. The Eskimos still do whaling too. 'Tis no different than any other kind of hunting except it's a much larger animal which many more uses. Whales are not at this time in any danger of dying out, nor do I believe that Japanese Whalers, who make their living from whaling, will go raping and pillaging the whale populations without the interference of activist groups. It's not only a part of their traditions, it's a part of their livelihood, and it would be counterproductive to over hunt them. As I said though, that's just a general impression on my part. I haven't seen the show, and I don't know a whole lot about the general history of Japanese whaling, other than that it is traditional to some extent. I do know the whaling industry was huge nation wide until the advent of crude oil, which replaced whale blubber as an energy source.
|
|
|
Post by Bubba's Dad on Nov 7, 2008 20:05:50 GMT -5
Whaling has been an important industry in many countries until the early 20th century, when crude oil and vegetable oils (such as peanut oil) became readily available in most places. Some products are still made from whaling, and with the whale population growing and not shrinking, whale hunting should probably be allowed for most species.
Whale hunting finally gave out here in the US around the 1920s, but its demise was started by the Confederacy in 1864 and 1865, when Confederate raiders such as the Shenandoah sank or burned nearly every Yankee whaling ship. This forced the price of whale oil used in lamps to top $5.00 a gallon. (The average Union Soldier was getting paid $13.00 a month!) Kerosene, a product of the newly discovered crude oil coming out of Pennsylvania, was available for $0.25 a gallon. Thus, crude oil was our first alternative fuel, forced into wide spread use by the rapid rise in price of whale oil!
|
|
dark
Student
Woah.
Posts: 16
|
Post by dark on Nov 9, 2008 0:29:42 GMT -5
Didn't bother watching the videos, I'm sure I've seen them before. I've been active in anti-whaling things, I've signed more than my fair share of petitions, both online and other wise. I've donated a lot to anti-whaling charities, and WWF. Thousands of whales killed, in the course of whaling history, is a drop in the bucket. Wrong. When one whale is killed, it immediatly affects the entire population of that species of whale. When thousands are killed, it's a huge blow to any whale species. Wrong again. When Eskimos(who prefer to be called Inuit, at least in Canada) hunt whales, they end up hunting one, maybe two. This can feed them over the winter months and into the spring and summer usually. if they are hunting more, it is not as many as a few thousand such as the Japanese. Often times it is FAMILIES livelihood to sell whale meat/products, and not a companies. Wrong yet again. Most species of whale are always in danger of dying out. Whale numbers are always very low compared to other animals. Even within species that have a high number of animals, it is still a low number. Whales are very suseptible to whaling activites. Since it is such a long gestation period for many whales, few are born each year. Especially in the baleen whales. They mate few times and have even fewer offspring. Killing any whale is always going to bring them one step closer to extinction. Grey, blue, Fin, Northern Pacific Right, , North Atlantic Right, and Sei whales are some of the most endgangered whales, the majority being baleen whales. (Baleen whales strain out water, catching and eating krill, while toothed whales hunt fish, seals and other such things.) (I've seen the WWF show on this so many times, it's thoroughly embedded in my brain.) (And please make the distinction between whales, dolphin and porpise. Dolphins and porpise are usually far more common.)
|
|
|
Post by ladytera on Nov 9, 2008 2:27:46 GMT -5
First off, I stated to begin with that this is not a subject I'm particularly well acquainted with. Secondly, I don't much care about being PC, Eskimo is what I grew up calling them and the term Inuit escaped me at the time I was writing (sleep deprivation occasionally limits my vocabulary). Killing any animal is always going to bring that species one step closer to extinction, so that's kind of a silly argument. You made my point about Inuit's hunting. It is exactly the same as any other hunting. It is done for food and to make useful products to sell. As to the When one whale is killed paragraph. I imagine within any herd one animal being killed within that herd will immediately affect the others of its species. As to the thousands having a drastic affect, I imagine that's probable, if all the thousands killed are from the same species, the same areas, and the same pods. Fewer whales are killed when compared to other animals. And while I'm sure there may be species of whales that are endangered, it does not follow that all whales are endangered. And no one here, that I'm aware of has been talking about dolphin and porpoise, most people are aware of the differences. Now, before you once again state that I am "wrong" because my opinion does not agree with yours, please site your sources if you believe you are stating fact. I did not site sources, as I stated ahead of time it was my opinion, based on limited information. The very brief foray I made into researching the subject this evening turned up increasing whale populations, www.iwcoffice.org/conservation/estimate.htm, and conflicting information on how whale populations have been determined previously and are being determined currently www.abc.net.au/rn/science/earth/stories/s1165701.htmGranted that is a small sampling, and the other tables and such that I ran across were difficult to navigate and understand. But, as I said, if you are going to state opinion as fact, please back it up.
|
|
Hravan
Journeyman
Life is a Musical
Posts: 106
|
Post by Hravan on Nov 9, 2008 7:36:00 GMT -5
Ok, I'm going to have to stick my butt into this as this annoys me incredibly. Not all Eskimos are Inuit so actually the term Eskimo is the correct term rather than Inuit. The Yupik also practise whaling alot. It annoys me how the PC brigade go "don't call them Eskimos! Call them Inuit" when actually there are a lot of Eskimos who aren't. There are two main cultures: the Inuit and the Yupik and then within those there are smaller branches. Yes, in Canada and Greenland all Eskimos there are Inuit (and in Canada the "official" term is Inuit) but in Alaska and Siberia it is mixed between Inuit and Yupik. And I know that in Alaska, at least, the term usually used is Eskimo. LT is from the USA, not from Canada or Greenland so it makes sense for her to use the term Eskimo seeing as there are non-Inuit Eskimos native to the land that is a territory of her country. Yes, I know there is a lot of difference between the Inuit and the Yupik in terms of culture, language and ethnics so really one term probably shouldn't be used to encase both cultures but at present and especially in Alaska, the term Eskimo is the best term we have in the English language to refer to both races. (As for the "raw meat-eaters" origin, that is now widely discredited. I'm pretty sure the origin is now believed to be "snowshoe netters" or "those who speak a different language". Will check later.) So please, don't jump on someone's back because they used the term "Eskimo" instead of Inuit. The Yupik are definitely not Inuit but are Eskimo. As for sources: most of this came out of my head from watching a lot of documentaries about it and a couple of books I got from the library years ago. So I'll try to find an internet source after I've finished my coursework.
Ok, regarding hunting. I'm against it commercially and for sport as I'm against all hunting for commercial and sport purposes. However, when the economy of a race of people is mainly dependent upon it (like the Yupik are) then I can understand it. Don't like it but I can understand it. However, the level of hunting that is taken for that purpose is not the problem: it is the commercial hunting. While it is a part of Japanese culture that doesn't excuse it from being regulated. (Hell, fox hunting has been a massive part of upper and middle class culture in Britain for hundreds of years - still got banned.) There does need to be limits of the number of some species of whales that are killed. Not only because there is a likelihood of some species become extinct but if the numbers fall drastically then there won't be any whale left for them to hunt of that species so others will be hunted more and the whole cycle happens again. Think the buffalo in North America. It's what happens when hunting is not regulated. There are some species that are in no danger of become extinct yet, but there are others which are in danger of becoming so. There needs to be regulations to prevent it from happening. Ok, as for the species that are in danger you'll have to excuse me. My head is full of geography coursework atm and I really don't have to time to write this post let alone look stuff up so I'll do it later when I've finish the coursework.
|
|
|
Post by Bubba's Dad on Nov 9, 2008 22:47:59 GMT -5
Well, you all know my view point on hunting, and simple prohibition will work to advance the population numbers only for a short time. If whale numbers are low, then the best way to grow them is by capitalism, that is make it pay. The American Buffalo is a good point. They were hunted almost to extinction, not by hunters getting meat or hides, the Indians have done it for a century or more, but by Government paid shooters. The idea was to force the Indians onto the reservations and make them cattleman or farmers by eliminating their food source. And it worked. The buffalo numbers came back only when the buffalo became a financial benefit. The same come back could happen with the whales.
Also, to say that whale hunting is OK for the Eskimo population because it is part of their culture but it is wrong for the Japanese just because it is part of their heritage is a bit hypocritical. It is wrong for all or alright for all. Licensing and taxing, along with real population studies would go a long way to make it right. And hunting with out a license is still poaching, and should be dealt with harshly.
Sports hunting and commercial hunting is were the money is, so that is how you fund conservation and research to expand the numbers. It worked with buffalo, white tale deer and even the brown bear. It takes money to fund conservation, and hunters are willing to pay. You may not like hunting personally, but if it could fund the main goal, a thriving and stable population of the hunted, then why not.
|
|