“Australian scientists have expressed serious doubts about a Japanese study which claims whales are losing blubber because more of them are competing for food,” according to a recent article at ABC Online. It continues,”The Japanese Government-backed study, published in the Polar Biology survey, examined more than 6,000 dead whales. It concluded that the amount of blubber on Antarctic Minke whales had declined over the past 18 years because increased numbers of whales were competing for krill and other fish.”
————————-
This blog is a gathering place for people with a common interest in politics and the environment. I strive for tolerance and respect. I don’t always agree with what I publish, but I believe in giving people an opportunity to be heard. I take no responsibility for comments and hyperlinks that follow each blog post. Some content may be considered offensive by some people.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Actually the article did not conclude what the ABC article says it concluded.
It only asserted that “an increase in the abundance of krill feeders other than minke whales and a resulting decrease in the krill population MUST BE CONSIDERED AS A LIKELY EXPLANATION.” (my caps)
“If there is a real decline in blubber then the reasons for that are much more varied and it could be a whole range of things that have nothing to do with amount of krill and whales” — Nick Gales.
Dr. Gales is right, it could be a range of things that have nothing to do with amount of krill and whales, and this should also be considered. Maybe he’d like to contribute in this area.
High Class Scientific Journal Publishes Japanese Whaling
High class scientific journal Polar Biology, has published Japanese results from the controversial research whaling program in the Antarctic.
Professor Lars Walloe , Oslo, is co- author , which suggests there are changes in the Antarctic eco-system , due to climate change ,because the minke whales have less blubber nowadays.
Anti whaling campaigners are worried that a publication in a first class journal will make whaling more acceptable.
From The Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/aug/26/whaling.wildlife
ABC radio has been running comments on the story all day
“Dr Nick Gales from the Marine Antarctic Division has told ABC’s Radio National the study is seriously flawed”
Also
http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx?StoryName=511501
what’s the truth in blubber hey
More whaling news on my blog.
BTW , do you folks now that the name Antarctic , comes from anti – Arctic?
After several years in the whaling debate I’m a bit severed , and post only INFORMATION from both prowhaling and anti whaling sites , so people can make up their opinion by themselves…..
The ABC journalist I heard did a hatchet job on Gales, as well. She tried a couple of times to get him to admit that the Japanese research was false. He wouldn’t say that, just that the statistical techniques they’d used were basic, that there were alternative methods they might have used and that he would like to see some further proof. He was measured and level, almost to the point of being unfair to himself.
However, this was a muck-racking journo chasing a big story. In the end, when she couldn’t get the answer she wanted from him, she just said, “OK, so you dispute the Japanese findings, now…” and just moved on to her next question (which was actually one in a series of allegations against the Japanese, as opposed to questions).
Now, I’m no fan of whaling, but that woman should be on commercial tabloid current affairs, not the ABC. She might as well have just interviewed herself.
TheWord.
You are spot on.
Cheers.
“Now, I’m no fan of whaling, but that woman should be on commercial tabloid current affairs, not the ABC. She might as well have just interviewed herself.”
Unfortunately that is par for the course when it comes to whaling “journalism” and sadly by extension reflects the calibre of wildlife reporting period.
Sad.
“Maybe he’d like to contribute in this area.” – David
Do you know that he is not?
“After several years in the whaling debate I’m a bit severed” – Ann
Oh dear!
“Unfortunately that is par for the course when it comes to whaling “journalism” and sadly by extension reflects the calibre of wildlife reporting period.” – IceClass
Yes, “whaling journalism” when covering both sides of the debate tends to be poor, but I have read several well-written and researched articles on wildlife.
Katy,
I find the comments attributed to him by the Aussie media rather strange, if he has something in the works himself.
Gales is correct to mention the possibility of other causes of a decline in minke whale body mass. But the most likely major contributors to changes in whale body mass remain as some function of whale numbers and comparative krill supply.
The whole truth can only ever be a case of “all of the above”. But unless Gales has some hard evidence that some other factors have a greater influence on body mass then the basic, “numbers vs food supply” must remain as the default assumption.