GRAY WHALES-SPIRITUAL WHALES

Hi,

When the sun shines on Gray whale blows in San Ignacio Laguna, the droplets form a glistening heart shaped rainbow. It’s a completely beautiful sight and at the same time, painful to know that a whale who blows a multi coloured shining heart should be at such risk.

When the whales come up to the small pangas with their babies, there’s no words to properly describe the experience. You can see how awkward it is for both human and whale, humans need to bend a long way over the side to touch whales, whales need to roll up close to the boats so their tummies and tongues can be scratched. Occasionally, you will see an eye measuring you up, staring with great curiosity. I always take my sunnies off so we can eyeball each other. Such an experience to have a whale once-over!

If you’re lucky, a whale will blow and the spray drenches you like an oceanic communion wine. Babies are cheeky, they love to show off, sometimes breaching or spy hopping dozens of times. They race to the boats often causing Mama whale to swim between the boat and calf in a gesture of protection.

I’ve been lucky enough to be so close to a big Mama whale when she opens her great mouth, showing off massive baleen plates , she lets me scratch her tongue. Gray whales love to have their tongues scratched, and the only way you know when she’s going to shut that great mouth is by instinct !

It’s impossible to ignore their intelligence. Or the lessons they teach their babies. Calves learn how to swim against the tide, how to feed, how to relate to other whales.

San Ignacio Laguna is a major Gray whale breeding ground. In good seasons, you can see the whales mating. The massive “ Pink Floyd” is a dead giveaway, weaving like a giant snake above the water. Gray Whales practice threesomes. Whether its sexual preference or commonsense is difficult to know. A female ready to mate will be virtually sandwiched between two males, the bottom one holding her stable so the male above can penetrate. Then the males swap places, all to the accompaniment of much splashing and thrashing. A dangerous place for young calves, especially if Mama whale doesn’t want to have any sexual relationships.

Calves stay with their mothers for six to seven months. A fairly short time when compared with Humpback whales who stay in family groups. Yet the Gray Whale is known as a fierce protector of her young. In the old days, she was called the “ Devil Fish” because of the way she protected her calf.

Of course the time old way of harpooning these whales, and all whales, is to go for the calf first. Then the mother when she comes to protect her baby and finally, the male who comes to protect them both. It’s obscene and although the IWC prohibits taking a lactating female or one accompanied by a calf, no one bothers to abide by the rules. There’s no enforcement officers out there in the Chukchi and Bering Sea. No rangers, no-one to check on the way whales are killed or the cruelty involved.

I’m always struck by the contradictions of stroking a Gray Whale in San Ignacio, knowing that she and her baby may well be slaughtered by the Russians when they make their long migration back to the feeding grounds of the Chukchi Seas.

The miracle of these whales is that they still come to humans, in spite of the ongoing killing.

That’s the true test of intelligence. To know where their friends are. These whales have come to me in my dreams, they have spoken to me in quiet times. Their message is one of unconditional love, such love for humanity. As the most ancient baleen whale left alive on Planet Earth, I believe these are spiritual whales who are calling on us for protection.

For the Whales,

Sue

GRAY WHALES

Hi,

Today's post is going to be focused on the beloved Gray Whales. For those of you who are unaware of their history, Gray Whales once roamed many of the world's oceans. Two races lived on either side of the Atlantic but were hunted to extinction in the 18th century. Unfortunately, the whales had a habit of hauling out onto sand bars, making them easy prey for hunters.

In 2010, the only remaining populations are the Western Pacific Gray Whale which is ecologically extinct with less than 100 Whales. These Whales are found around the Sea of Japan and the Okotsh Sea near Korea. Major oil exploration has almost certainly caused a significant decline in this population as Gray Whales are very sensitive to noise.

The only remaining viable population of this, the most ancient baleen whale left on Planet Earth, is the Eastern North Pacific Gray Whale, otherwise known as the California Gray Whale.

For many years, the only people who have slaughtered these whales are from Chukotka. Some years ago, an investigation by the Environmental Investigation Agency found that Chukotkan people had been using the allotted gray whale quota to feed foxes on fox farms. Up to 175 whales a year, far more than the Chukotkan people killed traditionally.

One hunter from the area had this to say according to a report by Christopher D. Stone.

" We never asked for the gray whales. Not even the Chuchki people did. Gray whales were taken in the old days by the local people, maybe fifteen a year. But only occasionally... they are dangerous. They attack to protect their young. Sometimes the leading bull will attack whaling boats as soon as he sees them. And the meat is no good."

The Yupik name for Gray Whales translates into English as something like " the one that makes you shit fast."

Although the Russian Federation says that the Gray Whales killed in Chukotka are no longer fed to fox farms, there is anecdotal evidence that the practice continues.

It is interesting to note that under the pre-cursor of the current IWC convention, the original Convention for the Regulation of whaling had this to say about indigenous whaling.

* The present convention does not apply to aborigines dwelling on the coasts of the territories of the High Contracting Parties provided that:

1. They only use canoes, pirogues or other exclusively native craft propelled by oars or sails:

2. They do not carry firearms:

3. They are not in the employment of persons other than aborigines:

4. They are not under contract to deliver the products of their whaling to any third person.

The California Gray Whale is an extremely vulnerable species, a specialist feeder reliant on climatic conditions. A number of scientists believe this whale could well be the first baleen whale casualty of climate change.

Don't let the IWC set a 10 year quota of 1,400 Gray Whales. Email the relevant authorities your protest, their emails are on the home page of the California Gray Whale Coalition website.

www.californiagraywhalecoalition.org

For the Whales !

Sue

Japan's whaling is illegal

Hi,

Today I would like to focus on the legal opinions which we have obtained that outline the violations of international treaties by Japan ( and Norway and Iceland).

The Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is an historic convention which was drawn up to protect the resources of the oceans and the oceans themselves.

Japan is in violation of the following provisions of the Convention. It is worth knowing these provisions if any of you want to take up the issue with your politicians. Be aware that the US has never ratified the Law of the Sea but under international common law, the US is still obliged to adhere to the obligations of the convention.

Articles 192 and 235 of the Law of the Sea Convention require Japan to “protect and preserve the marine environment,” including the more specific duty under Article 194(5) “to protect and preserve rare or fragile ecosystems as well as the habitat of depleted, threatened or endangered species and other forms of marine life.” Japan’s “scientific” harvesting of endangered Fin, Sei, and Humpback whales is a direct violation of this obligation.

Article 241 of the Law of the Sea Convention states that marine scientific research “shall not constitute the legal basis for any claim to any part of the marine environment or its resources.” Japan’s claim to hundreds of whales each year in the name of scientific research would appear to violate this provision directly.

Articles 204-06 of the Law of the Sea Convention require Japan to prepare and disseminate an environmental impact statement regarding its scientific whaling, because “planned activities under [its] jurisdiction or control may cause...significant and harmful changes to the marine environment.” See also Principle 17 of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, adopted June 14, 1992, by the UN Conference on Environment and Development, 31 I.L.M. 876 (1992), which says that: “Environmental impact assessments, as a national instrument, shall be undertaken for proposed activities that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and are subject to a decision of a competent national authority.” To meet this requirement an environmental impact assessment must discuss the probable impact of the proposed action on the environment and the adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the proposal is implemented, and must compare the costs and benefits of each alternative with the proposed action, including the alternative of no action. A sound environmental impact assessment should be the product of interdisciplinary analysis and ample opportunities must be provided for public input during the assessment process. "

These are violations from one convention only. In the coming days, I ll detail the violations under other conventions. Please also be aware that ONLY governments can mount legal action in international courts. We have explored any options available legally to force either the USA, UK, Australia and NZ governments to take action against Japan but there is no legislation which allows for the public interest in this awful dilemma. The public is shut out of the issue, governments rule the day. Which is why we MUST lobby our governments.

regards, Sue

JAPAN'S DREADFUL WHALING HISTORY

Hi,

For those of you who are not aware of the history of Japan's murder of the whale nations, here's some of the story, with thanks to Craig Van Note of the Washington DC Monitor Consortium who has written extensively on this issue.

In the 1930's, the Japanese Imperial Army directed the whaling massacre. During those years, several international agreements designed to prevent the over-exploitation of stocks of whales

were reached under the League of Nations ( forerunner of the United Nations.) The agreements prohibited against killing suckling calves and females with calves. Japan refused to sign or abide by any of these agreements.

After World War II, the Japanese government gave its whalers carte blanche. From l951-l964, the Japanese IWC Commissioner, acting on the orders of Japan's giant whaling companies, blocked all attempts at the IWC to halt the killing of blue and humpback whales.

Japan only agreed to the IWC ban on hunting blue whales after its seven fleets, deploying more than 100 catcher boats , could not find a single blue whale in 1964. But they did find remnant herds sheltering in the coastal fjords of southern Chile. In four years, Japanese whalers killed 690 blue whales, often pursuing mothers and calves into the deepest reaches of the fjords, where the still waters were stained with their blood.

There is much more of this dreadful history of murder. Japanese whalers continue to this day to ignore international conventions, 33 resolutions at the IWC calling for a halt of the obscenely entitled " Japanese scientific whaling " program; and their whalers continue to kill pregnant whales, and females with young calves.

And the response of the anti whaling nations ???? They want to overturn the global moratorium on commercial whaling and give Japan the go-ahead to return to commercial whaling.

We are betrayed by our leaders, and the whale nations, who cannot speak, are condemned to death.

Please protest to your own governments. Deluge the White House, deluge your Prime Minister's office. Do not believe the Australian government with their false promises. The anti whaling nations are tied to Japan with the trade obligations. Money versus whales.

The fact that whales, like the majestic Gray Whale, still come to humans is a miracle. We owe their nations their survival.

Sue Arnold, California Gray Whale Coalition.

More on whaling nightmares

Hi,

The news just keeps getting worse. South Korea has already sent a formal statement to the IWC which sets out their intention to coastal whale. Japan must be crowing with delight as their efforts to destroy the IWC and the world's whales are going from strength to strength.

Over the past few years, Japan has bribed nations with big money grants in return for these small countries joining the IWC and voting with Japan. Some of these countries are landlocked and have probably never seen a whale.

I've commissioned legal opinions from some of the best international legal experts in the western world. Every single opinion has detailed legal action which could be taken against Japan under a number of international treaties which Japan is violating. There's also mediation options but no anti whaling government will mount any legal action. Nor will they table their legal opinions or provide them to the lawyers working for the environmental groups fighting the resumption of whaling.

In bowing to Japan's efforts to resume commercial whaling, the western nations who claim to be anti whaling - USA, UK, EEC, Australia, New Zealand, Latin America - are all respectively setting an unholy precedent. In ignoring the legal advices, they are, in effect, turning the international treaties designed to protect whales and the marine environment into useless bits of paper.

Why ? Its all about trade. In the past, the excesses of Japan, Iceland and Norway to prevented by threats of trade sanctions by the US. When Dubya Bush got into office, that was the end of trade sanctions to protect whales. Trade rules supreme. Every major anti whaling nation is entrapped by its trade with Japan, so money talks, whales die.

If we lose the whale fight, there is no chance of protecting this beautiful Planet. People power makes for miracles, we can make a difference. I just watched the film Gandhi, its an old movie but the message is still powerful. He walked 240 miles across a large stretch of India with many people following, the Indian people practiced non violence and finally got their freedom and sovereignity against enormous odds.

Whales are highly intelligent animals. They have language, song, families and majesty.

They are the Mind in the Waters. When we act, they act.

Keep sending protests to the White House, to IWC Deputy Commissioner Doug DeMaster ( email details on the California Gray Whale Coalition Group F/Book site. Send protests in your own country to your President or Prime Minister. Just keep yelling loudly for the whales !

Sue Arnold, California Gray Whale Coalition

WHALING WOES - IWC DRAFT PROPOSAL

The IWC Chair has just released or should I say unveiled, a draft proposal which will be the focus of the forthcoming meeting of the convention in Morocco, June 2010.

Unveiled is a good word because the draft proposal is a template for the re-commencement of commercial whaling under the guise of a consensus agreement which is somehow supposed to save the IWC, but certainly not the whales. The public are being asked to believe a brand new spin. The IWC is going to save whales by killing them. You work it out !

Included below are the press release which has just come out of the IWC Secretariat and a critique of the draft proposal ( referred to as the Package) from major international IWC NGO organisations.

Although the IWC press release sounds like its all roses with their new proposal, the reality is downright terrifying. If you care about whales, read the whole enchilada. Everyone needs to understand the extent of deception which is coming from our governments.

Regards Sue Arnold

California Gray Whale Coalition.

Here is the link to the IWC press release. http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/21294957/250986474/name/press release 22-04-10.pdf

Here is the critique of the " draft proposal" by the major IWC NGOs from around the world.

ANALYSIS OF CHAIR’S REPORT TO THE SMALL WORKING GROUP ON THE FUTURE OF THE IWC

IWC/M10/SWG

March 2010

Synopsis of Concerns Relevant to the Chair’s Report to the Small Working Group on the Future of the IWC

· The Package legitimizes commercial whaling by suspending the commercial whaling moratorium for a decade. This is inconsistent with Schedule Paragraphs 10(d) and 10(e).

· The Package cannot legally limit whaling to only Japan, Norway, and Iceland as the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) does not permit quotas to be granted to specific nationalities.

· The Package does not prevent contracting governments from exercising their right in the ICRW to object to any or all of the Schedule amendment, or from leaving the Commission and returning with a reservation. A commitment not to do so in the Schedule is not binding.

· The Package does not prevent one or more countries from exercising their right in the ICRW to issue special permits (under Article VIII) anytime during the duration of the Package A commitment to do so in the Schedule is not binding.

· The Package does not phase whaling down or out.

· The Package legitimizes whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary -- an IWC-established sanctuary.

· The Package fails to provide adequate compliance mechanisms or sufficient deterrents for violations since contracting governments, not the IWC, will have primary authority to punish violations.

· The Package is not based on sound science. Catch limits will not be calculated using the IWC agreed precautionary scientific approach, the Revised Management Procedures, or even subject first to consideration by the Scientific Committee. They would be based on recent or historic catches (that have increased in recent years in apparent anticipation of this Package) with some potential manipulation to make the limits more politically palatable.

· The Commission would require a three-quarters majority to amend the quotas in Table 4 in the event that the Scientific Committee recommended lower catch limits, or to punish nations who violate those quotas by reducing catch limits. A three-quarters majority may not be possible to achieve.

· The Package fails to require the whaling nations to give up their reservations to the CITES Appendix I listing of whales. It provides an incentive for the whaling nations to continue trading with each other under reservation and to develop new commercial products from whale tissues and oils and develop new markets for the trade in whale products in the future.

· The Package may increase the likelihood that CITES downlists whales (allowing international commercial trade to resume). A commitment by the whaling nations, or even all 88 IWC members, not to propose or support a downlisting at CITES is irrelevant because CITES has 175 Parties and it is unlikely that all 88 countries would uphold their commitment in a secret ballot.

· The Package fails to consider that the whaling industry is uneconomical without substantial government subsidies. It thereby provides a lifeline to a dying industry.

· The Package could be extended ad infinitum by repeatedly changing the Package expiration date in the Schedule.

· The Package proposes a biennial meeting schedule for the Commission that is unworkable and inefficient, leading to a workload that cannot be completed. It is also inconsistent with the annual reporting requirements for many existing and proposed issues that the Commission is charged to consider.

· The Package imposes the costs of regulating whaling on all Contracting Governments, not just the whaling nations that will benefit from it. This may drive some nations to leave the IWC. Allocating these costs to non-whaling nations is unbalanced as there are no comparable fee structures proposed to help nations build or maintain their whale watching industries.

· The Package inappropriately combines Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling (to now be called Indigenous Subsistence Whaling) with commercial whaling for political, not scientific or management reasons. By eliminating the IWC’s historical practices of reviewing ASW quotas every five years, it undermines the integrity of the ASW category and threatens the status of vulnerable whale populations taken in ASW hunts. It is inconsistent with the Commission’s decision in 2008 to exclude ASW from the list of 33 priority issues.

· The Package fails to mandate that bycaught whales be accounted for in Table 4. If not remedied, this deficiency could encourage in increase in bycaught whales.

· The Package does not meaningfully address animal welfare issues. It fails to ensure that high quality and objective information on whale killing methods and time to death are reported and fails to mandate improvements in techniques and/or weaponry to reduce the suffering of hunted whales.

· The Package does not appropriately address civil society participation in IWC meetings. It continues to restrict full participation by all observers in IWC proceedings and committees and fails to adopt civil society participation standards consistent with modern multi-lateral environmental treaties.

· The Package will make it more difficult for the European Community to use Iceland’s application to join the EC as leverage to stop its whaling and trade.

· The Package was developed using a process that lacked any transparency. It prevented IGOs and NGOs from having any input or role in the negotiations.