Talk:International Whaling Commission
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Norway
"Since 1986 only Norway, Iceland and especially Japan have been issued with permits, with Japan being the sole permit holder since 1995 as part of their 16-year programme. Norway lodged a protest to the zero catch limits in 1992 and is not bound by them."
Could someone expand on Norway's legal objection? It sounds like if you protest then you are not bound by the ban and it's OK to whale as far as the IWC is concerned, which doesn't sound like much of a ban. —Tokek 17:55, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- That's correct and its just the way things are with international agreements. For example the United States hasn't signed the Kyoto Agreement and so it can pollute like billy-o if it wants. Basically the same deal with Norway. Pcb21| Pete 19:26, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Details about countries
Would a table of members, describing details such as when they joined the commission, whether they used to or currently hunt whales, and if they are landlocked (and perhaps their overall voting stance), be useful? Andjam 04:43, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Allegation of vote buying
It appear that only allegation which get publicity is the one which put unfavourable light on pro-whaling side. I will change the section to "Allegation of Politics". I will also add issues which get more prominence in prowhaling countries such as Japan. Vapour
Changed the title to "Politics". What U.S. did isn't allegation. I might later add Revised Management Scheme section, where pro whaling side is accusing anti whaling side of filbustering the scheme. Moreover, (allegedlly, of course) it was anti whaling side which initially inflated their vote by lobbying for countries such as Switzland (a land locked countries) to join IWC. IWC's purpose is to make whaling sustainable. To be a member of IWC while being against whaling on principle is just plain politics. Oh well, that what pro side claim, anyway. Vapour
[edit] RMS
I shifted RMS to Politics section simply because the content is about politics of RMS rather than what RMS is. I do not object to RMS being revived. Just that this time it should be about what RMS is. Vapour
[edit] Adding countries to Notes section
Anyone care to add the four new member countries to the notes section? could´nt figure out how to ( it´s late :) SammytheSeal 21:44, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Allegations of Japan try to force a whaling industry
Is it wise to add the allegations that whale meat is no longer particularly popular in Japan and even the scientific whaling meat is supposedly difficult to sell requiring various measures such as giving it away for free etc to try and entice customers and keeping whaling alive or is this best left for other articles? Nil Einne 22:56, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
- I would say no, Figures from whale meat stock movements show that whale meat shipped in July 2006 was 1723 tonnes, hardly a small amount... If that continued, demand would outstrip supply ..
Here are some partial figures for 2006 : ( all figures in Tonnes )
March - Stockpile size at previous month end 2898 -Incoming stock 539- Outgoing stock 827- Stockpile size at current month end 3610
April - 3610......2920......561.....5969
May - 5969.......129......357.....5741
June - 5741.......163......414.....5490
July - 5490.......905.....1723.....4672
Best I can do without knowing how to insert a table - hope it´s legible ;) SammytheSeal 23:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)