MONACO, 23rd Oct. 1997 The International Whaling Commission today adopted a quota that allows a five-year aboriginal subsistence hunt of an average of four non-endangered Gray whales a year for the Makah Indian Tribe, combined with an average annual harvest of 120 gray whales by Russian natives of the Chukotka region. A combined quota accommodates the needs of the two aboriginal groups hunting whales from a single stock. The commission adopted the combined quota by consensus, thereby indicating its acceptance of the United States' position that the Makah Tribe's cultural and subsistence needs are consistent with those historically recognized by the IWC. The Makah Tribe, located on the remote northwest tip of Washington state, expects to start its subsistence hunt in the fall of 1998 under government supervision. The Makah quota will not involve commercial whaling. "The United States has fulfilled its moral and legal obligation to honor the Makah's treaty rights. The right to conduct whaling was specifically reserved in the 1855 U.S.-Makah Treaty of Neah Bay," said Will Martin, alternate U.S. commissioner to the International Whaling Commission, and deputy assistant secretary for international affairs for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. |
ACTION ALERTContact YOUR Senator NOWPhone, fax or write telling the
White House Comment Line White House Fax Line US Capitol Switchboard President Clinton Vice President Gore
Tele/fax:
Tele: | |||
These are the FactsThe News Release (above) which was circulated to the World news media has several glaring mistakes. Incorrect: "The International Whaling Commission today adopted a quota that allows a five-year aboriginal subsistence hunt of an average of four non-endangered Gray whales a year for the Makah Indian Tribe. . ." The gray whale catch limit adopted at the 49th Annual Meeting in Monaco is the number of whales which may be taken from the stock concerned. There is no mention of who may do the taking, and it is understood by the Commission that if more than one operation seeks to utilise the resource, they will reach agreement outside the Commission on any local allocation. Misleading: "The commission adopted the combined quota by consensus, thereby indicating its acceptance of the United States' position that the Makah Tribe's cultural and subsistence needs are consistent with those historically recognized by the IWC." There is no reference made in the Schedule amendment as to who shall recognise the traditional aboriginal subsistence and cultural needs. This position is reflected in the Chairman's Report to the 49th Annual Meeting when "..a broad consensus was reached to accept the amendment of Schedule paragraph 13(b)(2).. This included the addition of the wording.. " whose traditional subsistence needs have been recognised" in the chapeau paragraph, and noting the extensive comments made by delegations in the preceding debate.. (Agenda Item 10.3.3.2) In simple terms: The IWC does NOT recognise the Makah Tribe. The Gray whale quota is a yearly maximum of 140 averaged at 124 (ie. a total catch of 620 whales is allowed for the years 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 with a maximum of 140 in any one year) but the IWC accepted the position that more than one group may utilise the quota. The IWC did not say that the Makah had any rights to take a portion of the quota but said all interested parties may negotiate amongst themselves. One thing that must be remembered here is that IWC resolutions DO NOT over-rule national or local laws where applicable. Only one factor was taken into consideration when the US Government authorised the Gray whale killing, the Makah Treaty of 1855, a document written 143 years ago which we are now expected to believe is still relevant today. | ||||
Legal Challenge to US Coastal WhalingLack of any adequate media coverage in most of the US makes it difficult for the average American citizen to have any notion that its Government is not only working hard to allow whales to be killed in its national waters - the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary to be precise - but spending big money to help the Makah start killing. In a remarkable display of double standards the Clinton Administration voted last year to ensure the Californian Gray Whale remain on Appendix I of the CITES treaty. Inclusion in this Appendix prohibits any whaling world wide. Yet the Government is leaving no stone unturned in its efforts to allow the killing of same whale in the USA. The only legal hindrance to the Makah beginning their grisly kill is a lawsuit, filed in Washington DC on October 17, 1997. Legally, the US government is way out of line. Not only has the government failed to undertake a proper environmental impact study but a five year monitoring program required under the Endangered Species Act is still l8 months away from completion. Other legal challenges are possible to stop the Makah going killing and those of you who donate funds to US environmental/marine conservation groups might ask why your group is not using the legal system to its fullest extent. Key Points of the Lawsuit Australians for Animals(AFA), Breach Marine Protection, UK, Congressman Jack Metcalf and others filed a lawsuit against William Daley, Secretary US Dept. of Commerce, James Baker, Administrator of NOAA, Rolland Scmitten, Director, NMFS in the District Court of the District of Columbia on October 17, 1997. The action seeks relief from the failure of NOAA and NMFS to comply with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Marine Sanctuaries Act, (MSA), the Whaling Convention Act, (WCA) and other statues by deciding to authorize and promote the killing of gray whales by the Makah tribe within the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary in Northwest Washington State. NOAA and the NMFS have undertaken and continue to undertake a host of actions without adequately considering the significant environmental effects flowing from these actions as required by NEPA and the MSA. The agencies' authorization and continued promotion of Makah whaling runs afoul of numerous statutory obligations, including the consultations requirements of the MSA and the permit issuance procedures under the WCA. In Addition, the agency's authorization and promotion of Makah whaling is arbitrary and capricious, and contrary to law, in contravention of the purposes of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the International Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna (CITES). Further readingThe Makah's Return to Traditional whaling Tribal Whaling Poses New Threat Read what people have to say
This Alert was prepared using information gathered and "The Whale Newsletter". To receive a copy of The Whale Newsletter contact: Sue Arnold, Australians for Animals. Ph: +61 66 843769 Fax: +61 66 843768 Postal Address: PO Box 673, Byron Bay, 2481, NSW, Australia. email: arnolds@om.com.au |
Back to Alert MENU |
![]() |
Whales on the Net - http://whales.magna.com.au |