1) As we already have heard countless times, whaling nations have blamed the whales for depleting fish stocks.
The Icelandic Minke Whaler’s Association states on their website dramatically with the headline, Whales or Life! on 21.02.2008. The following statement can be read (a rough translation):
Minke whales or life!
Now when the size of the cod stock is reduced, and when the capelin fishing is cancelled , one must start to look more closely what impact the minke whale feeding habits have here around Iceland.
According to the Marine Research Institute’s website:
the minkes consume 2 million tons of food each year. Of this, krill accounts for 37%, capelin 23%, cod 6 % and sandeel 33%.
During a NAMMCO meeting, that was held in Iceland 2005, facts were presented , that made one believe that the size/proportion of cod in the minke whale diet was larger than previously believed.
This is also in accordance with the samples of stomach content in minkes, which have been carried out during the last years.
Anyway , it’s certain, that the minkes have a big impact on the fish stocks and the marine ecosystem, now and in the future.
Last autumn the scientific hunt ended. Next spring, the whalers estimate to use maxim um 3 whaling ships for the hunt.
2) More problems for critically endangered Northern Right Whales in US waters:
Damaging delay to protect the North Atlantic Right Whale
We discussed the fate of the North Atlantic Right Whale back at the thread :
http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/001741.html#comments
One would have guessed that the situation would have improved for this species radically one year later, since the loss of even one right whale per year could mean to push the species towards extinction. According to WDCS, at least nine right whales have died since 2004 through vessel strikes.
“A damaging year-long delay to release vessel speed rules is impacting the survival chances of critically endangered right whales off the East coast of the USA. “ :
According to IFAW, an estimated 4 Right Whales are killed by ships annually.
“One year ago, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) approved a policy requiring ships to slow to 10 knots in whale populated waters, a speed which has been shown to significantly reduce the risk of injury and death to whales. Unfortunately, White House politics and the shipping industry have blocked this policy from becoming law”
Even if much money and resources have been poured into saving the North Atlantic Right Whales, mighty shipping and fishing interests seem to take overhand as usual when trying to protect a critically endangered species .
3) Another critically endangered whales, the Western Gray Whales ( Okhotsk –Korean Whales), are threatened by oil contamination : Oil in the diet of Sahkalin Whales.
4) Excellent BBC reporter, Richard Black, writes article, “ Small signs of whaling compromise” from a seminar in Tokyo organised by the Pew Charitable Trust. Excerpt from the article:
“There were hints from Japanese officials that a further downsizing of the Antarctic hunt might, perhaps, be offered one day.”
“Ending the whaling standoff will not be as easy as some in Tokyo suggested; for many people, it is anything but a trivial issue, more emotive than climate change, and a more potent indicator of the human attitude to nature than the global loss of biodiversity.”
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
A ” curiousa news” from the Icelandic Minke Whaler’s Associations website.
They stated that in January almost all soured whale blubber, which is meant for the Viking month , Thorrablot in February, is sold out .
During the Thorrablot, the Icelanders eat for example rotten shark and soured whale blubber.
“Rengi” is the blubber that is situated in the under front part of the whale , in creases. These blubber creases seem to be sought after and can number to 50 to 70.
OK, so we know that “the minkes consume 2 million tons of food each year. Of this, krill accounts for 37%, capelin 23%, cod 6 % and sandeel 33%.”
Is this just the North Atlantic Minkes or all minkes?
And what are these volumes in relation to the actual volume of those species?
And what do the cod eat? Do they eat krill, capelin and sandeel?
Do sandeel, capelin and cod occur in Antarctica???
To clarify, there is an Antarctic cod, but it is obviously not the same as what Icelandic minkes would be consuming. Remember, there a DIFFERENT minkes in DIFFERENT areas. Not too hard is it?
As for the hrefna article, it’s evident that certain species of whales eat some fish in some quantity.
Iceland exports various marine products, and if taking a number of whales on a sustainable basis allows them to increase their profits, they should certainly be allowed to do so in a decent, respectable modern world.
Hi Ann,
The “Rengi” part you speak of also fetches a high price here in Japan. I’ve seen blocks of it on sale in a whale speciality shop. Would love to try some, it looks fabulous. Have to wait for my birthday maybe.
Hi Ian,
I’m pretty sure that the MRI is talking about just their local population of minkes. Minkes in the western north pacific consume a range of different fish too. I often have a meal of Pacific saury, one of the fish species that these whales are known to prey upon, but fortunately this saury is in massive abundance (both in the sea and in the market place it seems). Prices are thus very cheap so I can afford to eat it anytime. Perhaps the fishing industry could make more profit by catching less saury (perhaps making more food available for whales? dunno), and then catching some more whales instead. More whale supply might help reduce tuna demand too.
Oh yeah! I forget there is that “moratorium” on whaling, but heh, does it really matter to anyone anymore 🙂
” More whale supply might help reduce tuna demand too.” – David
I saw on Remi’s blog , that tuna is substituted by horse meat in Japan!( for saving tuna)
Ian,
There is a complicated interaction between cod, capelin and Minkes in the NH ecosystem. I’ll come back later on this!
” And what are these volumes in relation to the actual volume of those species?” – Ian
I have no stats available right now , but to give the topic ” whales eat too much fish” a dimension , it’s believed that in the Barents Sea , pirate fishing of consumer fish is about 100 million tons, the same amount that is believed that the minkes consume.
Personally, methinks that the whales eat too much fish issue is nonsense. It makes me recall Mao’s China, when Mao said that all sparrows should be made extinct because they ate too much grain in the fields. So the Chinese killed million s of sparrows and it ended with that the grain fields were destroyed completely by insects….
Thank you Ann and David for your informative comments that serve to highlight the knee jerk antagonism of Travis. He was so eager to insult that he could not get his head around the fact that a reference to northern species could also be in relation to the Pacific.
I look forward to your next post, Ann.
Ian wrote:
>Is this just the North Atlantic Minkes or all minkes?
This is a pretty clear question you asked Ian. There was no ‘Northern Hemisphere’ in the question. There are Northern and Southern Hemisphere minkes and various populations in-between (this has been mentioned in previous posts). To my knowledge there are no sandeels or capelin in the Antarctic, where most Southern Hemisphere minkes feed. I would have thought you were aware of this…
Ian then wrote:
>highlight the knee jerk antagonism of Travis. He was so eager to insult that he could not get his head around the fact that a reference to northern species could also be in relation to the Pacific.
If you don’t make yourself clear Ian, it can’t be helped what sort of reaction you’ll attract. You’re fault there, so take responsibility.
Ann,
Your Mao sparrow analogy is apt. One wonders what would happen if mosquitoes were wiped out too, which many would support. Regarding a comment here by a poster, beware of sheep that are furry on the inside 🙂
Hi Ian,
Here’s an excerpt from the marine ecosystem in the Barents Sea:
“Species interactions in the Barents Sea
Cod, capelin and herring are the most important fish species in the Barents Sea, while minke whale and harp seal are the most important marine mammal species. Cod prey on capelin, herring and young cod (cannibalism) (Bogstad and Mehl, 1997), and herring prey on capelin larvae (Huse and Toresen, 1995). Minke whale and harp seals are predators on cod, capelin and herring (Nilssen et al., 2000; Folkow et al., 2000). It has been observed that the feeding and growth rate of cod and harp seal vary with varying food abundance (Mehl and Sunnanå, 1991; Kjellqwist et al., 1995). ”
http://www1.uni-hamburg.de/BECAUSE/content/case_study_1.html
It’s also very interesting to note that a case study from Icelandic waters , mentioned that if the cod stock was allowed to increase , this would mean that the shrimp stock would decrease!
Indeed a very sensitive and complex issue….
Our friend Rune from HNA, states this morning in paper Fiskeribladet:
http://www.fiskeribladetfiskaren.no/?side=101&lesmer=6437
that whale meat is climate friendly.
” People can eat whale meat with good conscience” continues Rune.
” The impact on climate from cattle/ livestock is for example 8 times bigger than from whale meat”.
One meal with whale meat has the same impact on the climate / environment as 8 meals of cattle.
The estimates of the greenhouse emissions are based on CO2 -equivalents.
Whale meat : 1,9 CO2 equivalents/ kg meat
Lamb : 17,4
Cattle: 15,8
Pork : 6,4
Chicken : 4,6 according to previous studies.
” The future is bright for Norwegian whaling industry” , says Rune.
” One meal with whale meat has the same impact on the climate / environment as 8 meals of cattle.”
OOOPS! Sorry , I meant of course that 8 meals of whale meat have the same impact on climate as one meal of livestock!
Sorry again….
Less death per meal too, Ann.
So at this stage are there any studies of the food conversion efficiency of species that can indicate how many kg of cod, capelin etc is required to;
1 maintain a minke at same weight, and or
2 increase their weight by 1kg?
It would seem that any discussion on impacts of harvesting cannot take place until this sort of information is available.
The Nunavut Wildlife Management board (www.nwmb.com) will be meeting to discuss the application for an additional quota of one Bowhead whale.
They meet on March 6th.
” St Andrews University was criticised last night for accepting funds for whale research from the Japanese agency which directs the country’s annual whale hunt.
The Japanese Institute of Cetacean Research is regarded internationally as a scientific fig leaf for the country’s commercial whaling ambitions. Conservationists say that by taking money from ICR, scientists at St Andrews help to legitimise its activities. The university argues that the research was undertaken to improve scientific understanding of Antarctic whale populations”
http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,2261528,00.html
” Activists from the Sea Shepherd group threw containers filled with a mild form of acid made from rotten butter at a Japanese ship.
The group described it as “non-violent chemical warfare”, but Tokyo condemned the actions as illegal and said several people were slightly injured. ”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7274345.stm
If I’m not totally mistaken, one of the activists from the previous attack , told ABC that something along the line that there must be other ways to fight whaling. A clash with Watson!!!
Hi iceclass,
Canadian whaling is not something we hear about much, so I was interested to take a look at your link.
Do you think Canada would be interested in joining a new international organization for sustainable use (generally perhaps, or maybe specific to whaling only)? Or is the arrangement that Canada has right now stable enough for them to want to steer clear of the international circus surrounding it all?
“Eat a whale and save the Planet! ”
Now the Norwegian article is translated to English.
From San Diego Times:
“OSLO – Eat a whale and save the planet, a Norwegian pro-whaling lobby said on Monday of a study showing that harpooning the giant mammals is less damaging to the climate than farming livestock.
Environmental group Greenpeace dismissed the survey, saying almost every kind of food was more climate friendly than meat.
AdvertisementThe survey, focused on whale boats’ fuel use, showed that a kilo (2.2 lbs) of whale meat represented just 1.9 kilo (4.2 lbs) of greenhouse gases against 15.8 for beef, 6.4 for pork and 4.6 for chicken.
‘Basically it turns out that the best thing you can do for the planet is to eat whale meat compared to other types of meat,’ said Rune Froevik of the High North Alliance, which represents the interests of coastal communities in the Arctic”.
Greenpeace dismisses the study:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/science/20080303-0940-climate-whaling.html
Ian,
Ian I doubt there are any food conversion efficiency studies on minkes. Have they not only been done with livestock? Even if it might be a good measurment methinks that ” natural” animals all have a good rate, see for example kangaroos.
Pork and chicken have good food efficiency rates compared to cattle and sheep and what I have heard it can be improved ( something to think about with human overpopulation),
In the Norwegian version of ” Save the planet – eat whale meat” , HNA states that it is important that the whales have good feeding grounds, especially good herring and capelin feeding grounds.
Is this a slight change from the usual theme that the whales are blamed for depleting fish stocks???
It’s two sides of the same coin Ann (or two sides of the same cube, or whatever). Ensuring whales have enough food to eat is an obviously necessary aspect of their ensuring their conservation and sustainable use, just as much as ensuring that they are not over-predated on.
A Japanese publication I read recently containing a collection of papers by a range of researchers in the marine field included one by an ICR researcher who also noted the importance of his research for the same reason (being able to ensure food for whales as well as humans).
Of course, anti-whalers tend to assume that all whalers and all those tolerant or supportive of whaling are the Devil, and would hence be cynical.
Ann, the problem with the food conversion studies done on Kangaroos is that they only take a snapshot of total body weight, not of net meat production.
With the exception of hibernating animals, when a lot of wild animals find an abundance of food they respond by adding a portion of extra weight but make their main response in the form of reproduction, not meat production.
The most common response is to produce twins in a “good year” and consequently, the total mass of animals is increased but most of it is bone etc.
The great advantage of domestic animals is that they can respond by getting fat, in the same way their domesticators do. So when the “net meat gain” is determined for various species we get a different picture.
It also depends on when the data is collected. For example, the data from the males of migrating species just before they set out on annual migration would show much greater productivity than just after they returned.
And as whale females are generally not monogamous it is quite likely that they could all achieve high fertility rates if only half the number of males made the journey to the breeding grounds.
It would seem that the key to sustainable harvesting is in being able to electronically tag the majority of breeding females (ie when with calf) so that males will comprise the majority of the harvest. This is basic, fundamental animal husbandry, as it developed in domesticated animals some 10,000 years ago.
It started with the visual identification of the weak members of a wild herd and developed to include the planned harvest of surplus males and past reproducing females.
And it is surprising that certain interests could find this to be such a radical idea.
“Of course, anti-whalers tend to assume that all whalers and all those tolerant or supportive of whaling are the Devil, and would hence be cynical.”
You’re starting to sound like Schiller!
“It also depends on when… such a radical idea.”
Some people just don’t get cetacean biology and research.
And of course, the other fundamental element of animal husbandry is to ensure that there is adequate food supply for the herd. Selective harvesting and maintenance of food supply are the two halves of the one practice that has guaranteed the survival of species it is applied to.
It is a lesson that the green movement has consistently failed to grasp as each time there is drought in Australia there are millions of their “protected Kangaroos” that die a cruel, miserable death whilst inflicting major damage on the pasture remnants. The silence of the RSPCA on this issue is a disgrace.
The green movement’s Kangaroos remain there long after the farmer has removed his sheep and cattle and cause the critical damage that then takes years to recover. It is criminal negligence of the first order but the green culprits then blame the farmer for the state of his landscape.
And now we see evidence of the same negligence in relation to whale populations and their food requirements. The thought of culling a herd in response to a depleted food stock is completely off their radar.
So do, please, Libby, tell us, specifically, what it is about whale biology that makes all of them incapable of the rudiments of herd management. And spare us the obscure guff on some minor, non-commercial species. You repeatedly make the slur that I don’t “get it” but never substantiate. Time to deliver.
Hi Ian,
The Whaling Library site has a detailed article on the subject of the RMP (unfortunately in Japanese only) by Shoichi Tanaka who was one of those involved in it’s development
( http://luna.pos.to/whale/jpn_rmp1.html )
In it Tanaka covers the RMP rules regarding sex bias in the catch. He notes that in baleen whale populations, at certain times and in certain places segregation of males and females is known to occur, which could potentially result in the ratio of males:females caught being quite far from 50:50. He notes that in the Antarctic minke commercial whaling data, catches were predominantly females, and in research whaling data as well it was found that many mature females were found in the densely populated area around the ice edge. This of course has consequences for management.
The RMP takes this into consideration, and adjusts catches downwards in situations where females predominate in the catch.
Tanaka suggests that this creates an incentive on the part of the whaling operator to avoid whaling in areas where females are known to be dominant, so as to ensure that they can obtain as high a catch as possible.
“Time to deliver.”
And the point in such an exercise would be…?
Ian, there has been some substantiation. These issues have already been discussed here:
http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/002175.html
Ah, memories…
And yet still whales=bovines and travel in herds.
If ‘electronic tagging’ could be cheaply and successfully carried out the Japanese would not have to go to the Antarctic to skewer their fins. There is actually literature in English too on female composition during migration/on feeding grounds. Amazing! Some done by Dr Corkeron, but on a ‘minor, non-commercial species’ (well until next year anyway).
>He notes that in the Antarctic minke commercial whaling data, catches were predominantly females, and in research whaling data as well it was found that many mature females were found in the densely populated area around the ice edge. This of course has consequences for management.
David, what was the ratio of male to female minkes in last season’s JARPA II?
One could find that information on the Internet, Travis.
… and in fact you just linked to a copy of it yourself.
David: There is some limited participation w/NAMMCO.
Whether or not “Canada” would join a new organization is hard to say without a clear picture of what such an org would be and entail.
Please remember that any such decisions would be made by the Feds (Canada), the views and interests of a tiny minority of whale eaters is unlikely to be much of a factor in that decision.
Whaling in Canada’s north is managed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the same guys who are busy denying Inuit access to fishing quotas from their own waters and giving it instead to southern interests with more clout and votes.
The report On the carbon footprint of whale meat is available at
http://www.highnorth.no/Carbon%20footprint%20whale%20meat%20March%202008.doc
The press release on Low carbon whale meat available at http://www.highnorth.no/read.asp?which=381
Indeed David, but it would have sounded better coming from you given your mention of Tanaka’s work.
‘The breakdown of Antarctic minke whales sampled in Japan’s latest research program is outlined below.
• Total: 503 (Male: 154; Female: 349)
• Immature, non-reproducing females: 63; mature females 286 (Pregnant mature females 262 or 91.6 percent; non-pregnant mature females, 24 or 8.4 percent.)’
Interesting in regards to the RMP and current and available knowledge on a species.
The irony is that for as long as the sustainable harvest of whales remains under serious challenge then the probability of serious investment in tagging and identification technology remains low.
If the industry was not under challenge then there would be a very powerful motivation to develop the technology that would ensure a much higher proportion of males in the harvest.
Those who oppose all whaling through article of faith, like Libby has demonstrated above with her, “And the point in such an exercise would be…?”, have no interest in taking any action, or providing any information, that could assist in achieving a sustainable use of the resource.
Another reason why the whaling nations must wash their hands of the IWC and form a new body with the capacity to exclude those nations that do not support the sustainable resource use principles of the UN.
IceClass,
I see, very politicized. Some Maori in New Zealand have complained that the government isn’t consulting them when forming policy etc too.
R,
Greenpeace’s response to that was pretty poor. There is a big gap between “Eat vegetables” and “Stop whaling”.
Travis,
A little more information from the Tanaka article for you. The adjustment downwards for the sex bias occurs when the percentage of females included in the catch exceeds 50% within a so-called “small area” in the 5 year period of operations prior to the new catch limit being set.
As for research whaling, last year in the uncompleted survey the 349 females caught was less than half of their target of 850. In the first year of JARPA II in which the target was reached, females made up 45.8% of the catch. As basically random sampling is employed (surveying both high and low density areas) one might expect that over the long term the ratio should be not far off 50:50 or whatever the actual ratio within the populations are.
The Icelandic Minister of Fisheries, Mr Gudfinnsson , stated yesreday that the condition of the fish stocks aroun Iceland is good. However he was worried that the extension of the minke whale stock , as they fed on cod . The situation for the cod stock is still not very satifying and the quotas must be kept reduced still for another 10 years.
Capelin fishing has as well reopened and a big shool was sighted some days ago ( so the minkes haven’t eaten the last one).
On another note from Remi’s blog:
” The Japanese Government is organizing another whale policy trade fair tomorrow, to encourage several small countries to join the International Whaling Commission and support the resumption of commercial whaling. According to the Japanese Foreign Affairs Ministry, the target countries are Angola, Cambodia, Congo (Brazzaville), Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ghana, Laos, Malawi, Micronesia, Palau, Tanzania and Vanuatu”
OOOps ! The spelling is too bad , need some coffee!!!
“Those who oppose all whaling through article of faith, like Libby has demonstrated above with her, “And the point in such an exercise would be…?”, have no interest in taking any action, or providing any information, that could assist in achieving a sustainable use of the resource.”
Can you please provide me with evidence that a) I oppose all whaling, b) have no interest in taking any action or providing any information, that could assist in achieveing a sustainable use of the resource.
The question, my dear, was aimed directly at you. There was no “slur”, it is fact, as evidenced from both the archives and what you continue to write. I have provided you with plenty of information in the past and it has made no difference to your knowledge base. In fact it leads to some sort of abuse from you or made up crap. But continue along this path Ian, and your prose about the legal aspects of blog ettiquette may come knocking on your door.
Travis has kindly provided a link to the tagging discussion we have already had here. It made no difference to you then as now.
Whaling is about killing whales Ian, not investing in finding out about tagging technology. The aim is to find the whale and kill it. Non-lethal research can encompass long-term research into the life history of individuals, utilising methods such as photo-ID, or to a lessre extent, tagging. The Japanese have poured millions into their SO operations, research included. Your assertion that a challenge to killing whales is holding up tagging technology has no basis whatsoever.
R,
Just on the High North PR – the story has been taken up in Japan via Reuters:
http://jp.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idJPJAPAN-30627220080304
(that Reuters classified this as “oddly enough” indicates the brainwashed mindset of the west).
A couple of 2ch threads picked up on the story, with one attracting around 500 comments so far. Greenpeace’s retort to the study in particular is being mocked for not addressing the finding of the study, but simply harping on about meat versus vegetables.
Good story here:
http://news.smh.com.au/garrett-aggressive-japan-whaling-chief/20080305-1x3i.html
Hideki Moronuki confesses to being a Midnight Oil fan – a former one 🙂
There, there, Libby, take a deep breath. The implication was in your own words, ie what purpose would your providing information serve? Many people would assume that this indicated you might only release information if it served your own purpose.
And your own words, “Whaling is about killing whales Ian, not investing in finding out about tagging technology. The aim is to find the whale and kill it”, would seem to suggest that you are ‘anti-whaling’, don’t you think?
I would have thought that all the other readers of this blog, who are unlikely to go searching through the archives, would gain insights from you that they might otherwise miss out on. The fact that part of the topic was covered some 9 months ago is of no relevance to them. And my questions are posed with that in mind.
But I see you are starting to make references to “usual abuse”, etc on my part, which is your standard precursor to a bile vent. So deep breath now and calm, calm. There, that wasn’t so bad, was it?
“Hideki Moronuki confesses to being a Midnight Oil fan – a former one :)”
Well he wouldn’t be alone there.
“Many people would assume that this indicated you might only release information if it served your own purpose.”
Many people Ian? Are you speaking for others (again)? And there you go again making assumptions with zip all to back it up and trying to discredit someone (oh what do ya know, it’s me). Standard fair.
“And my questions are posed with that in mind.”
Admirable Ian! The points you raised here are as you raised “9 months ago”, and you didn’t learn anything then. Travis provided a link to those comments, and I provided a current comment, so the argument is dead.
“would seem to suggest that you are ‘anti-whaling’, don’t you think?”
Web definition -“whaling n. The business or practice of hunting, killing, and processing whales.”
I guess this person is anti-whaling too? You really are desperate, but it is hard evidence of your constant misinterpretation of the written word of some in order to benefit your argument and mislead others. So tell me, why is there no telemetry in JARPA II or JARPN II?
“make references to “usual abuse”, etc on my part, which is your standard precursor to a bile vent.”
Oh? I am not alone in recognising your childish behaviour -one only needs to go to other threads to be amused. But there you go again crediting behaviour to someone else that is really your own, LOL! You need to take some responsibility Ian. It’s a good lesson for your kids and could also be a cheaper option in the long run!
” So why is there no telemetry in JARPA II and JARPN II ? – Libby
A very good and interesting question! Even the Icelanders are carrying out telemetry . Excerpt from the Marine Research Institute Iceland :
” Tracking the movements of baleen whales by satellite telemetry. In the last few years experiments have been conducted on the use of satellite linked tags to follow the movements and dive pattern of minke, fin and blue whales in Icelandic waters”
Libby, Ann,
Is that a harpoon you see sticking out of the humpback whale in the photo at the bottom of page 3 in this old JARPA document?
http://www.icrwhale.org/pdf/02-A-31.pdf
Both wrong. JARPA did involve satellite tracking, as does JARPA II. The technology needs further work though.
Sorry for the “double” post.
My computer here will not open your document, but I will stand corrected. Obviously they need to brush up on their techniques. Published work from a number of researchers is showing that this is an area where promising and interesting results are finally being made. Perhaps it is not a “serious investment” from a country which has made its modern name from tiny electronics. Obviously a large brass bell around the neck doesn’t work.
That is an interesting conceit, Libby. Motty asks a question 9 months ago, the response is apparently unsatisfactory and you characterise it as his failure to learn. I also think this is an interesting line of inquiry and don’t think it is right to insult someone who asks an inconvenient question.
If you insist that whaling can only involve the killing of whales then your mind has obviously excluded any prospect of sustainable resource management. Resource management must involve concepts like ‘herd management’ that really seem to get up your nose. Thanks David for advising that telemetry is part of JARPA.
What I understand about the telemetry tech is that the experience in Japan is that it’s hit and miss. The transmitter can be damaged on deployment, or alternatively the transmitter can come away (I’ve heard of cases where transmitters have reported a whale “beaching”, but mysteriously, no visual reports of a beached whale… so presumably there is also scope for transmitters to simply float around in the ocean, producing misleading data).
This is not to say I doubt the potential of the technology, just that it doesn’t seem to be there yet, from what I’ve heard about attempts to utilise it by Japanese scientists.
Perhaps foreign scientists who prefer to avoid lethal methods may have already resolved all of these issues, I’ve not tried too hard to find out, but I certainly don’t recall reading about these issues having been overcome.
In JARPA II the technology is still being used in a more experimental fashion to try to develop and improve it further, it seems.
Also, The Nunavut Government put out a RFP for a prefeasability study for trade in Sealskins and whalemeat with Greenland.
In Nunavut, most whales are taken for the nutritious skin. Most meat is not consumed by humans, if at all.
Greenland however has a taste for the meat.
I seriously doubt anything will come of this proposal beyond some consultant getting a few bucks to write the obvious.
This appears to be more of a reaction to the recent temporary Greenlandic ban on the import of Canadian skins (which was ostensibly about jacking up the price of Greenlandic skins.).
“Greenpeace’s retort to the study in particular is being mocked for not addressing the finding of the study, but simply harping on about meat versus vegetables.”
Let them eat cake!
Alex,
I’m not particularly interested in your opinion of my answer to Ian Mott. There is a history of the same points (supposedly based in fact) being posted here despite evidence to the contrary. If you have the time to familiarise yourself with that history, then I’d welcome some dialogue.
“If you insist that whaling can only involve the killing of whales then your mind has obviously excluded any prospect of sustainable resource management.”
The ultimate aim of whaling is to kill whales. To dispute this is pointless. Whether research of any kind is attached to this or not, the core business is the harvesting of animals. Your claim that my mind is excluding anything is baseless.
“Resource management must involve concepts like ‘herd management’ that really seem to get up your nose.”
Can you provide evidence of this please Alex, or are you simply a Mott ring-in who resorts to misrepresenting people?
“The transmitter can be damaged on deployment, or alternatively the transmitter can come away…”
Yes, these are still issues. There was the recent case of a humpabck which had been tagged in the tropics but the transmitter ceased operating. Months later it started again when the animal was in the Soutern Ocean. Transmitter deployment techniques and life expectancy has been greatly improved, but it still remains a very costly execise in all respects and needs a lot more refining. The future will hopefully see many of the classic mysteries about cetacean behaviour revealed.
Alex McAdam,
Why is it that Ian Mott can tell a new poster to refer to the archives but Libby cannot? And you talk about insults?
“(See analysis of growth rates from past inventories as posted on this Blog (Google the blog Moebus).
And kindly refrain from cyber stalking, you sad plodder.
Posted by: Ian Mott at January 7, 2008 10:22 AM)”
Most anyone is familiar with Ian Mott’s failure to learn, double standards, arrogance and bullying, but maybe he has had to rally up his fan club.
As you can see, Alex, the rent-a-crowd has had a rev-up again. Ignore them. The last thing they ever want to see is a balanced discussion on the practical aspects and technology improvements that would be needed to properly implement a system of sustainable resource management. So they start with a claim that I have been abusive and then use it as an excuse to let fly themselves. It is their standard MO for closing down a discussion they don’t want to take place.
Frankly, I would have serious doubts about the ability of anyone from the mainstream research community having the nous to develop a cost effective whale tagging system. The critical breakthrough is more likely to come from an experienced fisherman or whaler who will see the problem from a different perspective.
The last thing the anti-whalers want is for those other perspectives to be introduced. For one thing is absolutely certain. The moment the industry can consistently demonstrate that the harvest is of surplus males and post-fertile females, the arguments of the anti-whalers will be blown out of the water. The fundamental maths of herd dynamics will prevail.
>Frankly, I would have serious doubts about the ability of anyone from the mainstream research community having the nous to develop a cost effective whale tagging system. The critical breakthrough is more likely to come from an experienced fisherman or whaler who will see the problem from a different perspective.
RAOTFL!!! What a crock of poo-bah you continue to sprout forth! It’s so funny. But it’s also like watching a train crash in slow motion. As if anyone here would expect anything else from poor Mott, who has been SO hard done by by…EVERYONE! Nasty and incompetent researchers! What a complete ignoramus you really are!
Ah… the ‘herds’ and ‘babies’ and ‘whales=cows’. A female whale is referred to as a cow, a male is referred to as a bull, a baby whale is referred to as a calf. These terms originated many years ago, when whaling was common (but then whales used to be called fish too). They can reside in groups, schools, pods and aggregations, but the term herd is largely unused, and a remnant from the whaling days. The closest relatives of cetaceans are believed to be hippos. The social organisation of some closely resembles that of elephants. Being entirely aquatic, long-lived, carnivorous etc they tend not to be compared to bovines, well at least not by people with any knowledge. So constantly ignoring current terms used to describe cetaceans is a bit like saying you are a dog, your wife is a bitch and your kids are spawn – not entirely correct but can be useful to prove a point!
” The moment the industry can consistently demonstrate that the harvest is of surplus males and post-fertile females, the arguments of the anti-whalers will be blown out of the water” – Ian
In Norway big cows were the preferd animals , at least till some years ago…. now the tendency seem to be that young small ( males?) are prefered since the meat is better.
And what about post-fertile cows? Frankly I don’t know about this issue. Or are the whales as horses , fertile up to almost the day they die????
Anyone have comments on this?
http://www.iwcoffice.org/_documents/commission/future/IWC-M08-INFO11.pdf
The end is near I think.
“Australia’s resolute opposition to commercial whaling”, “Australia will never support commercial whaling”…
heh 🙂
I see what you mean, Motty. They sure don’t want this conversation to continue.
The ways man first began to domesticate wild animals has some interesting implications for whale management. They got to them while very young, especially orphaned ones, or when they were hungry and more prone to accept the offer of food. They started with basic conditioning using signals, like bells, to develop a communication linked to food. And just as graziers do today with a bunch of new cattle, they took time to get them used to being moved about and “worked”.
And it would seem that some whale specific variation to these concepts that develop a measure of cooperation and trust would lead to a much cheaper method of tagging than just running about the wide ocean shooting darts into randomly selected wild animals.
Ann, I am assuming that fertility rates would wane with age. But others may differ.
Thanks for that example of self serving Australo-bollocks David. It makes my flesh crawl to read it. It is obvious that the IWC is irreparably broken and the best thing whaling nations can do is leave the IWC to the wonkers, “making all their no-where plans for no-body”.
Interesting thoughts, Alex. Get a portion of them them into the habit of being handled from an early age and manage these tagged ones as a semi-domesticated herd and leave the others alone. Makes sense to me, if it can be done.
Alex and Ian have to be one and the same person. Two people couldn’t be so bloody stupid. I’d love to see an Antarctic fin whale handled at an early age, especially an orphaned one. Of course you would have to find one first, and as it has been pointed out before, we don’t know where their breeding ground is (gee that was taken in first time around wasn’t it?). But find enough of the critters, round em up and shepherd them from the Antarctic to the Pacific and back each year until they are big enough for slaughter and it makes a lot of sense. Yeah, I think you are onto something there. In time I can see Ang Lee’s offspring making a movie about whale cowboys “Finback Iceberg”. Orcas could also be trained to herd such beasts like oceanic border collies. There may be a problem with whale rustlers, as once trained these whales may not be entirely faithful to their original owners, but if you can have a Konrad Lorenz session where you actually take the offpsring from the mother when first born and allow them to follow a whaler cowboy in SCUBA who bottle feeds them for a few months, I’m sure they would become very conditioned and faithful. Just don’t, whatever you do, let them watch their herd-mates get slaughtered, otherwise you might have a scenario like “Cows with Guns.”
And I was joking about the cow bell…oiy! Yeah, let’s continue this insane conversation.
Ann, I’ll answer you privately about whale reproductive longevity.
Yeah Ian, mammals fertility are age age -dependent, but an interesting and off topic point here.
Schimp males prefer old females rather than young ones as they are more experienced.
Thanks Libby! Looking forward to your comment!!!!
Libby makes me crack up….and Ian, some info from the High North Alliance. According to them , minkes are unsuitable for farming or domestication.
I did say, semi-domesticated, Ann, a bit like the tame whales that hang around tourist boats. Or the numerous dolphins that come to shore to interact with humans, all over the world. Would Libby rule that out on the basis that serving tourists would require the whale to wear a tuxedo?But of course, a sneer comes so naturally to Libby’s mouth, don’t you think? Especially when combined with exaggeration to the absurd.
But to continue on from Alex’s suggestion, one can’t help wondering if dolphins couldn’t be trained to attach adhesive tags to whales. I know the US Navy trained them to attach explosives to to ships and find lost sailors. So it is hard to see why they couldn’t be trained to attach a limpet style transmitter to a passing whale. And who knows, they might even be far better qualified, and positioned, to distinguish the sex of whales as well so they only tag the males.
But of course, if one’s mind is only capable of proceeding as far as the first excuse to stop thinking, then we wouldn’t be typing messages to the other side of the planet, would we? We would all be comfortable with our lilliputan certainty.
>serving tourists would require the whale to wear a tuxedo?
Don’t killer whales already wore tuxedos?
Yes, the humpbacks of Hervey Bay are indeed tame Mott. I assume you have taken the kids for the bucking bronco whale breach ride? Oh, you mean ‘semi-domesticated’, like being able to go up to them and give them a big pat and hug and maybe take one for a swim? Have a go. Sure the dolphins of Monkey Mia are ‘semi-domesticated’! They are provisioned to take free hand outs, but also have to make up the rest of their food from the wild. Have a read what the effects of some of these interactions have had on reproductive success/infant mortality. Try and get a dorsal tow from one of them. No biting, butting, karate-chopping or attempts to kill you guaranteed!! Just out of curiosity Mott, is the grizzly that raids a backpacker’s tent semi-tame too? Is the red-bellied black that snuggles in your sleeping bag semi-domesticated?
> Especially when combined with exaggeration to the absurd.
What else can one do when confronted with this? (Write another Mott Rap!)Your comments stunned me into silence there for a while as I thought you HAD TO BE JOKING, but alas clearly you are not. Shudder.
If you do a little googling Mott you may discover that sea lions have actually been trained to film gray whale behaviour on migration. Seals have been trained for search and rescue. Small cetaceans and pinnipeds have been trained for military purposes, as you mentioned – more incentive there than any nonlethal researcher, fisherman or Japanese whaler to find new technology – you overlooked that one Mott. Bets on that the US Navy finds the tagging technology courtesy of staff who used to be fishermen or whalers and sell it to the Japanese. You mght have to train the large whale to happily accept the tag from the dolphin, but with so much training going on, anything is possible.
I think the Japanese had better use your killer whales for the tagging and sexing, as your average dolphin would freeze its butt off in the Antarctic, but then you may have a bit of a chase on your hands with the tagger and the taggee. If you can overcome this though I’m sure the whalers could even train killer whales to insert the harpoons into only certain age classes and sexes of the larger whales and maybe even tow them back to the boat and flense them too. Give them a specimen jar and scalpel and you could get some serious research happening – wouldn’t that put the nousless whale researchers out of a job? Better still – train the Taiji dolphins to beach themselves and that’s half the job done. Brilliant! Hell, why haven’t they done that David?
>But of course, if one’s mind is only capable of proceeding as far as the first excuse to stop thinking
The ability to stop thinking and resort to humour implies that contributors here can do nothing else in light of your dumbass comments. You however, obviously don’t possess the capacity to think at all!!! Priceless.
Gosh, all that bile over some simple musings that go no further than wondering out loud. Keep it up folks. Readers can see how over-eager you are to attack any suggestion that sustainable whale harvesting may be possible. But I guess the hallmark of the truly mediocre is their capacity to turn any minor hurdle into an insurmountable barrier.
I have had the honour and pleasure to be friends with a few people who have made themselves seriously well off. And what they have in common is a willingness to look at options that others would discard as silly. That doesn’t mean they do silly things, far from it. They just like to know that they have examined all the possibilities. They are NEVER afraid to ask silly questions.
Interesting that Libby is willing to share whale fertility information with Ann but not with the rest of the readers here. Maybe it is information that wouldn’t help her position. It wouldn’t be the first time she has been selective with the facts.
I guess this is the kind of stuff that will prompt the whaling nations to dump the IWC. Life is short, why put up with global village idiots?
Thanks for the link David.
Looks like the same old song from the Aussies then.
The IWC should just be shut down and abandoned.
The hunters can form their own management regime.
The animal protest industry has too much of a built-in profit motive on this issue to ever seek any workable compromise.
One might as well give up the charade and get on with producing good quality and healthy food for people who want it.
I come to the conclusion reluctantly but I don’t see any real tangible benefits to the IWC forum any more.
“wondering out loud” – Ian Mott
So do it in your bathroom Ian, not in a public forum. Stick with your well-off friends who may be more willing to accept your silly arguments and suggestions.
“Life is short, why put up with global village idiots?” – Ian Mott
Perhaps that is what Libby is thinking Ian?
Louis Wu
For some interesting comments, and a slightly more balanced view than cherry picking-on one country:
http://www.iwcoffice.org/_documents/commission/future/IWC-M08-4.pdf
>all that bile
Bile? That was constructive criticism and sensible observation dressed up with humour. Bile is what you produce. Don’t get confused.
>Keep it up folks.
Great, been given the greenlight.
>They are NEVER afraid to ask silly questions.
You have established here for all to see that neither are you.
>Interesting that Libby is willing to share whale fertility information with Ann but not with the rest of the readers here. Maybe it is information that wouldn’t help her position.
Not sure what position Libby is in that could be jeopardised by whale fertility information, but sounds intriguing 🙂 I’m sure whale fertility could hide some sinister facts that the whaling nations may be able to use to their advantage Mott. Perhaps fin whales stop breeding at 40 years of age and live another 20 years? Scandalous stuff.
> It wouldn’t be the first time she has been selective with the facts.
To educate the readers Ian, where has she been selective with the facts?
>Life is short, why put up with global village idiots?
Hands up those who ask that every time they see your name Mott? Priceless!!
Ian, these people read like trainee thought police. And you are obviously a bad, bad, dude for even suggesting that there might be ways to harvest whales sustainably. So don’t be discouraged because they wouldn’t be attacking you so disgracefully if you really were talking complete crap. Travis even helped out with some advice about the use of seals and sea lions.
I suspect you are right, IceClass.
Are you on drugs Alex?? Do you perhaps reside up Ian’s nether regions and only come out when he is relaxed? Your comment here would suggest you need to make up stuff to compensate for it.
Interesting isn’t it, Alex. Libby tells you she doesn’t give a proverbial rats arse for your opinions and then she, Travis and every other pseudonym they can drag up dumps a load of their “opinions” (if one could charitably call them that) on everyone else.
The ease with which they drop all pretence of debate for blatant personal attack really demonstrates how eager they are to shut down any perspective on whaling that is different to their own.
I agree with IceClass and think this material demonstrates to the Japanese and other whaling communities that there is really no point in negotiating or consulting with people or nations that clearly demonstrate their absence of good faith. They are part of the problem and will never be part of the solution.
My you have it in for Libby don’t you Ian?!! Bait bait, ginger, ginger…Mott. Who is the smarter, and has some integrity?
I believe the fan club started with your mate Alex. I also provided a link which you obviously haven’t bothered to read, just went straight into your soap box blather. Careful Ian, with such a tight sphincter Alex might not be able to breathe.
Any plans for discussion on topic, Travis? As usual, plenty of ad hom attack but nothing of substance. Watch out Alex, they’re making a new voodoo doll.
>>IceClass,
>>Ian,
Yes, at least as far as a resource management organization goes, the IWC is useless and, unless nations start to honour the agreements that they have put their signature to, will remain that way.
However, the ultimate solution, I believe, requires not only an international body to properly manage whaling (and protect itself against attacks on it’s officially agreed mandate), but also a forum where the anti-whalers can continue to complain. The IWC may be useful in such a role (perhaps the anti-whalers will want to change it’s name to something other than the “whaling” commission, modify the convention a bit etc).
Ironically some western over-analysts have this idea that Japan might stop whaling if there were a way to “save face”, but I see the problem as being that the anti-whalers don’t have any face-saving way of toning down their anti-whaling campaigns. If we move to a situation where whalers get to catch whales on a conservative, sustainable basis, and the anti-whalers can continue to complain about it, I think we will have an equilibrium.
This could be a useful model for other controversial wildlife management issues.
>> Ian
I tend to find it faster these days to simply skip Travis’s comments.
>Any plans for discussion on topic, Travis?
If you’d have read my posts at 07:10 and 09:58 you would know wouldn’t you? But ‘As usual, plenty of ad hom attack but nothing of substance.’ LOL! You not only don’t post on topic Ian but don’t read what people have posted on topic. Then you post an attack about it!
So as usual no substantiation on anything from you Mott. Lots of wild accusations and trying to defame people like Libby but nothing else. Back up what you say with straightforward facts and someone may care.
At least I don’t feel so bad now for doing the same to you David. Phew. Pick this cherry, miss that one…
Japan doesn’t give a stick about the IWC anyway so what are you all whinging about? Do something useful and complain about real issues, where people really are hard done by. Go on, give it a go and try and care about someone else. Just for a change.
“We do want to see some signs of movement towards the original purpose of the whaling convention, which is a resource management and conservation treaty,” said Mr. Morishita.
“If we do not see any signs of movement, then other options begin to look more attractive, and we will look at them with more interest.”
Many of the anti-whaling countries believe a break-up of the IWC would effectively remove most conservation safeguards. However, there are wide ranging views about how to move forward under the current circumstances. Some favor compromise, while others, backed by most conservation groups, believe a combination of awareness-raising and diplomatic pressure in Japan will eventually persuade the country to unilaterally abandon whaling.
Over the coming weeks, events will largely be driven by whether fundamentalists or the moderates will prevail.
“If people don’t want a way forward, then I don’t see much future for the IWC or for the future of the management and conservation of whales,” said Dr. Hogarth.”
Source: http://www.redorbit.com/news/
I also kindly ask almost all contributors here to think about the quality of the discussions. As it is now a few readers have taken contact with me and said they won’t participate as long as the attacks are ongoing and that’s a pity since we have a forum/ blog where we can air our different opinions in a polite and informed way.
The real reason for the vitriole this time is the fact that management options have been examined that assume that whales have similar intellect to cattle. To the zealots, this gross heresy is worthy of a fatwa because they cling to the delusion that whales are as intelligent as humans. (Well, judging by some of the comments here, there may be some truth in that after all)
They really don’t like being reminded how poorly the whales went in their unit of “human predation 101” or in, “long-term survival 101” which the bovine species, through their willingness to work with humans, have passed with straight “A’s”.
That is why the image of whales being herded like cattle, by humans working with other species, is enough to chill their blood. For it demolishes the foundations of that carefully constructed edifice, their mass delusion.
I think it would be worthwhile for the whaling nations to do this, if only for the publicity value.
But I don’t think any of us need to worry about what forum the anti-whalers will have. Onanism is, after all, hardly a group sport, although after reading the Australian Paper, they could well prove me wrong.
Bait, bait, bait…
Sorry Ann, I realise this is in a similar vein to what you asked not to happen, but it is clear that Mott just can’t help himself in the hope he will get a bite, and he is as transparent as his lower intestinal lining who he wants to hook. The fact is he just sounds more and more stupid and pathetic, but for what point?? Why say things that obviously aren’t true, or attribute things to people that quite clearly they haven’t written? Or accuse others of behaviour that is actually his own? As for the ‘ideas’, he has proven himself to be nothing more than an imbecile who loves the limelight. And yet David chooses to read Mott’s stuff and condone it?? I am not sure which is more scary.
But the baiting will continue Ann. A male ego bruised and challenged. Very sad.
Personally, I found the opinions of the respondents to the IWC survey a clear indicator that not much will be achieved this week. There is, and always has been, problems on both sides. Perhaps the mediator can come here when they’ve finished in London.
I believe the ancestor of cattle- the Auroch- is extinct Ian, at the hands of human beings.
Of course, Roger, ‘ancestors’ by definition, are dead. Just as the ancestors of every living whale are dead, some by human hands, others by other natural causes. Welcome to reality.
Shit you’re stupid Ian Mott. Look up what an Auroch is and the definition of extinct. You do not live in reality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auroch
“According to the Paleontologisk Museum, University of Oslo, aurochs evolved in India some two million years ago, migrated into the Middle East and further into Asia, and reached Europe about 250,000 years ago.[1] They were once considered a distinct species from modern European cattle (Bos taurus), but more recent taxonomy has rejected this distinction. The South Asian domestic cattle, or zebu, descended from a different group of aurochs at the edge of the Thar Desert in India; this would explain zebu resistance to drought. Domestic yak, gayal and Javan cattle do not descend from aurochs.”
Ergo, Roger Grace, as modern european cattle are the same species, ie descendents of aurochs, then aurochs are clearly not extinct, merely deceased. But I suppose an apology would be asking too much, wouldn’t it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bos_primigenius
“The aurochs or urus (Bos primigenius) was an extinct, very large type of cattle originally prevalent in Europe. The animal’s original scientific name, Bos primigenius, was meant as a Latin translation of the German term Auerochse or Urochs, which was (possibly incorrectly) interpreted as literally meaning “primeval ox” or “proto-ox”. This scientific name is now considered invalid by ITIS, who classify aurochs under Bos taurus, the same species as domestic cattle. In 2003, however, the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature “conserved the usage of 17 specific names based on wild species, which are pre-dated by or contemporary with those based on domestic forms”[citation needed], confirming Bos primigenius for the Aurochs. Taxonomists who consider domesticated cattle a subspecies of the wild Aurochs should use B. primigenius taurus; the name B. taurus remains available for domestic cattle where it is considered to be a separate species.
At one time there existed three aurochs subspecies, namely Bos primigenius namadicus (Falconer, 1859) that occurred in India, the Bos primigenius mauretanicus (Thomas, 1881) from North Africa and naturally the Bos primigenius primigenius (Bojanus, 1827) from Europe and the Middle East. Only the European subspecies has survived until recent times.
Domestication of the aurochs began in the southern Caucasus and northern Mesopotamia from about the 6th millennium BC, while genetic evidence suggests that aurochs were independently domesticated in northern Africa and in India.[11] Domestication caused dramatic changes to the physiology of the creatures, to the extent that domestic cattle have been regarded as a separate species (see above).
Genetic analysis of aurochs bones and of modern cattle has provided many insights about the aurochs. Though aurochs became extinct in Britain during the Bronze age, analysis of bones from aurochs that lived contemporaneously with domesticated cattle there showed no genetic contribution to modern breeds. As a result, modern European cattle are now thought to be descended directly from the Near East domestication process. Indian cattle (zebu), although domesticated eight to ten thousand years ago, are related to aurochs which diverged from the Near Eastern ones some 200,000 years ago. The African cattle are thought to descend from aurochs more closely related to the Near Eastern ones. The Near East and African aurochs groups are thought to have split some 25,000 years ago, probably 15,000 years before domestication. The “Turano-Mongolian” type of cattle now found in Northern China, Mongolia, Korea and Japan may represent a fourth domestication event (and a third event among Bos taurus–type aurochs). This group may have diverged from the Near East group some 35,000 years ago. Whether these separate genetic populations would have equated to separate subspecies is unclear.
In the 1920s two German zoo directors (in Berlin and München [“Munich”], respectively), the brothers Heinz and Lutz Heck, attempted to breed the aurochs “back into existence” (see breeding back) from the domestic cattle that were their descendants. Their plan was based on the concept that a species is not extinct as long as all its genes are still present in a living population. The result is the breed called Heck Cattle, ‘Recreated Aurochs’, or ‘Heck Aurochs’, which bears an incomplete resemblance to what is known about the physiology of the wild aurochs[citation needed].”
“Nunavut’s land-claim organization wants the territory’s wildlife board to consider increasing — or scrapping altogether — the quota on hunting bowhead whales.
Representatives of Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans were at a public hearing in Iqaluit Thursday of the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, which is thinking of adding a second bowhead whale to this year’s quota.”
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/2008/03/07/bowhead-quota.html
Roger, if you are going to make a post that purports to show a wider, supposedly more informative quote than the one I posted, it is generally a good idea to avoid leaving out bits that have a bearing on the issue. You have selectively pasted bits that were before my quote and bits that were after my quote but left out other bits of relevance.
The key point is still the fact that aurochs were once believed to be extinct but this has since been over-ruled by the taxonomists.
For the record, I enclose the latter part of my quote above and the first part of one of Roger’s paras to show the part he chose to leave out.
[My quote “The South Asian domestic cattle, or zebu, descended from a different group of aurochs at the edge of the Thar Desert in India; this would explain zebu resistance to drought. Domestic yak, gayal and Javan cattle do not descend from aurochs. end my quote] Followed by
“Modern cattle have become much smaller than their wild forebears: the height at the withers of a large domesticated cow is about 1.5 meters (5 feet, 15 hands)[10], whereas aurochs were about 1.75 meters (5.75 feet, 17 hands). Aurochs also had several features rarely seen in modern cattle, such as lyre-shaped horns set at a forward angle, a pale stripe down the spine, and sexual dimorphism of coat color. Males were black with a pale eel stripe or finching down the spine, while females and calves were reddish (these colours are still found in a few domesticated cattle breeds, such as Jersey cattle). Aurochs were also known to have very aggressive temperaments and killing one was seen as a great act of courage in ancient cultures.”
[start John’s quote “At one time there existed three aurochs subspecies, ..”]
So essentially, mankind managed to hang onto calmer aurochs and tended to mate them with smaller animals that were easier to work. The only “extinct” part of the ancient species is their agro, a behavioural attribute that their progeny no longer require. They adapted to changed circumstances over time and those who didn’t adapt their behaviour failed to pass on their inheritance.
And by the way, if you had any familiarity with Brahmin cattle you would recognise the similarities in size, aggression, and horn shape.
Yes Motty. I think there is also a very large italian breed that matches the size and horn shape but is much calmer. It is really stretching it to believe that an attribute of behaviour is a key element of species genetic inheritance.
The ultimate research for Motty’s whale -cows!!!
” A review of the controversial scientific research conducted by Japan and its whalers has uncovered a list of “bizarre” and useless experiments, including how to cross breed cows with whales.
Scientists have analysed 43 research papers produced by Japan over 18 years, finding most were useless or esoteric.
The scientific research included injecting minke whale sperm into cows eggs, and attempts to produce test-tube whale babies, News Limited newspapers report.
For years Japan has continued its whaling program under the guise of scientific research, to the disgust of anti-whaling nations such as Australia.
The head of Australia’s scientific delegation to the International Whaling Commission (IWC), Dr Nick Gales, labelled the research “bizarre”.
“[The research involves] really bizarre and strange experiments with sheep and pigs and eggs,” he said. “It’s totally esoteric; very strange indeed.”
At the IWC meeting in London this weekend, Australia will argue for the closure of the “scientific research” loophole in the commercial whaling ban, which has allowed Japan to continue its program.
Source: http://news.smh.com.au/
Well, Ann, the “head of Australia’s scientific delegation to the International Whaling Commission (IWC)” would say that, wouldn’t he? He is part of a team trying to close the scientific research option without any indication of allowing Japan to re-visit the opting out clause.
And while I cannot speak for science that I am not familiar with, my understanding of the scientific method is that one normally does a whole lot of experiments that fail. But the elimination of the non-possible greatly improves one’s chances of discovering the possible.
It would be standard operating procedure for an Australian DEH departmental goon to go down the list and pick out the ones that would seem the most unexplainable to the uninformed.
And this neatly serves to divert attention from the fact that it is the cognitive capacity of whales that has the most in common with cattle. Their behaviour when compared to other marine species like octopus, dolphin, seals and orcas, lacks evidence of problem solving, alliance making, adaption, co-operative effort and cross species communication. That is, somewhat similar to cattle.
“The key point is still the fact that aurochs were once believed to be extinct but this has since been over-ruled by the taxonomists.”
-Ian Mott.
I could easily have posted the entire piece, but I provided the link in case others wanted to read it. The piece I selected was adequate. However, you obviously did not even read this. The Auroch is extinct. It’s phylogenetic relationship to groups of extant cattle is stil being resolved, which is what the wiki piece says. Regardless, the Auroch is extinct. The argument is deceased.
Who is “John”, Ian Mott? Your inability to even get my name right further illuminates your incompetence and stupidity.
“And while I cannot speak for science that I am not familiar with, my understanding of the scientific method is that one normally does a whole lot of experiments that fail. But the elimination of the non-possible greatly improves one’s chances of discovering the possible.” – Ian Mott.
You are seriously suggesting it will eventually be possibe to breed whales with cows? Presumably then when minkes go extinct you can say they are actually still in existence.
“cross species communication” – Ian Mott.
Can you please tell us how your listed species (including cattle) cross-species communicate? I expect some pretty solid evidence supporting this claim.
“Adaptation” is not simply rooted in “intelligence” Ian Mott. That is pretty basic natural science, but you can’t even understand that.
I am no whale or dolphin expert, but I work in a marine field. There is a pile of literature out there on baleen whale behaviour, including “alliance making”. The major difference, which is pretty obvious to a 2 year-old, is that your average baleen whale cannot be put in a tank or sea pen like an octopus, dolphin, orca or seal, so in other words, there is an extreme lack of data due to logistical impossibilities.
I am also familiar with Dr Nick Gales, as he worked here in NZ on Hooker’s Sea lions for a while. He is most definately not some “departmental goon”, but has extensive experience in marine mammal medicine (being a veterinarian) and innovative marine mammal research. He currently heads up projects designing and implementing satellite tags for large whales in Australia. Considering Ian Mott’s previous comment regarding researchers not being able to design tags whereas a fisherman or whaler would be able to, and his well-noted hate of anyone working in research or the government, his comments are not surprising but typically based on opinion not substance, ignorance not fact.
hi what are