This is a conversation between two people after watching the documentary, “The Cove,” a real-life-mission-impossible-mission to film the dolphin slaughter/harvest in a small cove in Taiji, Wakayama.
- Yank: That was eye-popping, to say the least.
- Jap: Camouflaged HD cameras, underwater microphones, world-class divers, an espionage under 24H police surveillance …
- Yank: No, I mean the freaking bloodbath that happens over there at Taiji.
- Jap: What did you expect? They harvest the dolphins as food; they do need to kill them somehow.
- Yank: When a highly organized animal like a dolphin is shrieking in pain because he/she is slit in the stomach, spewing blood like in one of those Saw movies, you can’t help but feel their pain.
- Jap: Dude, you watch too much “Flipper.”
- Yank: Maybe, but I don’t think one should be oblivious to animal cruelty, which is just an extension to human cruelty. Would you smash a cute kitty into pieces for consumption?
- Jap: Of course not. BTW, that does happen in China.
- Yank: Forget semi-lawless China. Civilized countries have pets because they can interact with them. Interaction also implies sophistication on the animal’s part, and a complex sensory system to detect pain. One estimate has it that dolphins are about as intelligent as a two-year old human being. Would you kill babies (tongue in cheek)?
- Jap: Or how about they’re only smart as a two-year old and therefore different from human beings. Dolphins aren’t these cutesy animals until you brainwash them to make a buck — as in Ric O’Barry who singlehandedly created the business of domesticating and saving dolphins.
- Yank: And he’s regretful of his past actions.
- Jap: Ah, the typical I’m-sorry-for-killing-hundreds-of-thousands-of-civilians-to-shape-your-country-like-ours-therefore-you-obey-us-or-else-American-imperialism.
- Yank: Let’s not go there. Dolphins are highly sociable animals as they communicate with intricate vocalizations, just like humans. They have an individual conscience in addition to human-like interactions within and among pods when they go on hunts, or to dislodge parasites. They are also very playful and can start to form bonds with other species.
- Jap: Dolphins smart and cutesy => Cruel to kill? How about pigs in the United States, kangaroos in Australia, dogs in South Korea, humans in North Korea, monkeys in China, or shoot, whales in Norway or Iceland?
- Yank: I don’t agree with any of those slaughters. I’m a vegan anyways. Just because everyone else does it, does not mean it is OK for you to do it.
- Jap: Then why all the freaking media attention on just dolphins (or whales) and just on Japan? Couldn’t Hayden Panettiere swim out to Iceland? I heard it’s warmer over there thanks to AGW.
- Yank: Well, I can’t speak for all media, but Japan does have the largest market for whales and dolphins — therefore, the most killings.
- Jap: And the second largest economy.
- Yank: So the moratorium on commercial whaling was implemented in 1986, but whaling continues in three basic forms: aboriginal, small-scale coastal and scientific. No one wants to touch the aboriginal fishermen since if whaling is banned there, the people would die off. Commercial whaling in Norway is not bound by the IWC moratorium because the country is formally reserved, and therefore, not disputed in legal terms. The “scientific whaling” that is conducted by the Japanese government is on shaky legal grounds because of the commercial sale of the whales after being done with the research — thus, the constant criticisms from non-environmentalists as well.
- Jap: It’s a little annoying to see the constant quoting of the term scientific whaling like it’s BS. Selling meat is a legal requirement under the IWC terms (pdf) to avoid wasting valuable resources. The criticism that the Japanese scientific whaling program is a “thinly veiled” commercial program is absolutely baseless and it is derived from the emotional discontent with the whaling itself. You know Japan can easily opt-out of the IWC and resume their commercial whaling practices basing their management decisions solely on the ICR.
- Yank: Remember, there have been more whales caught and killed now than compared to the moratorium (Wowk 2009). The program is basically sustained by the commercial sale of the whales with a touch of government subsidies. I mean, how did this whole “scientific whaling” start in the first place? The program started as a reaction to continue commercial whaling in 1987 to join the IWC (while appeasing other countries). It is absolutely natural to say that the commercial sales are influencing the number of whales caught and the science itself. Would you trust a global warming study funded by an oil company?
- Jap: I understand the conflict of interest, but that doesn’t prove that Japan’s whaling is primarily commercial. As long as the Institute of Cetecean Research decides that they need mortality samples to calculate important model parameters like mortality, reproductive rates, pollutant effects, etc., and biological data like age, reproductive status, history of female whales, internal tissues and stomach contents, there will be dead whales and the selling of its meat (Aron et al. 2002). Grabbing important population information is 100% consistent with the IWC’s goal of sustainable marine resources. Do you either want bad population estimates or do you want them to just throw the meat away?
- Yank: There’s increasing evidence that non-lethal samples (Australia and New Zealand will start a non-lethal whaling program) can be sufficient in understanding the whales’ population dynamics (Clapham et al. 2003). The IWC (International Whaling Commission) scientists themselves have strongly criticized the legitimacy of its fatal research and much of the publications that comes from ICR is bunk (ibid.). They even go as far as to say that the whaling program is so poor that it wouldn’t survive any legit scientific review, and the ICR is not letting anyone do it (ibid.).
- Jap: And the head of ICR has stated (pdf) that they’ve presented all of their results and data for review. Now let’s suppose, as you say, that lethal research is bunk, and all countries (aside from aboriginal tribes) stop whaling. Then whales increase to its carrying capacity. Are you saying that even a sustainable whale harvest is unacceptable compared to a high population density of whales that could result in more death by bycatch and collisions with ships? Here’s a shocker: 90% of non-natural death of whales is caused by ship collisions, with bycatch trailing as the second cause, followed by fishing. It’s not uncommon to hear a fishermen say that whales and dolphins get tangled up in their fishing nets, reducing their harvest.
- Yank: Therefore, we need to construct ship-free zones so the whales are safe. I’m not sure if that data includes illegal whaling into the mix. Remember, the decline of whales were caused by massive commercial fishing in the first place.
- Jap: I agree with putting measures that will maximize whale and dolphin populations. I am just saying that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t harvest them. Some estimates say a large number of whales in the ocean can be a contributing factor to the declines (pdf) of fish. Fish declines are even a bigger problem ain’t it?
- Yank: That estimate is weak at best (Clapham et al. 2003). It doesn’t make distinct the seafood that humans consume, among other things like using a very simple measure wrt the complexity of the problem. It’s not such a crazy idea that whales and the fish were in some kind of dynamic equilibria for epochs before humans came along.
- Jap: Yes, it’s weak, but it’s better than nothing. What I’m saying is that much of the whaling problem is reduced to a moral issue. Is it so off the mark to mention racism as a factor in the strong discontent? I know Americans freak out when they hear that word, suppressing all thought from there.
- Yank: There may be cultural misunderstandings.
- Jap: Um, Japanese-are-weird-and-cruel-and-opaque-and-suppressed-and-dishonest-and-suicidal-and-uptight-as-fuck-cuz-they-make-love-with-anime-characters-and-buy-porn-mags-off-vending-machines-and-eat-shrimp-that-is-still-kicking-and-paint-their-faces-black-as-a-sign-of-rebellion-and-do-the-limbo-whenever-taking-photographs-to-make-their-faces-appear-smaller-and-are-incapable-of-leaving-their-rooms-aside-from-taking-a-dump-at-a-ground-level-toilet-and-go-around-town-on-a-Segway-and-drink-shiso-flavored-soda-and-never-invest-in-foreign-funds-and-have-exceptionalist-attitudes-towards-gaijins-and-wrestle-with-fat-thongs-and-pay-money-to-go-out-drinking-with-hot-women-to-tell-you-that-your-bald-head-is-sexy-and-employ-elevator-girls-that-equip-white-gloves-that-approach-you-as-if-you’re-not-capable-of-pressing-a-single-button-and-have-variety-shows-that-force-people-to-jump-inside-50℃-baths-and-they-bow-even-when-talking-on-a-telephone-and-eat-beef-that-is-marbeled-beyond-an-upscale-kitchen-counter-and-offend-peoples’-personalities-as-a-sign-of-affection-and-therefore-we-need-to-change-them?
- Yank: Uptight? Yes.
- Jap: It’s not a great feeling when a group of environmentalist from a country start to judge a country for one aspect that they disagree with and start talking about things such as boycotting Japanese products, or making big budget reality TV on soft eco-terrorism. I’m sorry but not being uptight is equivalent to apathy.
- Yank: Some of the environmentalists are rabid, but I’d say a lot of Japanese are rabid in protecting marine mammal harvest that they don’t eat anyway. I’d say racism occurs both ways as the Japanese would never listen to anything what a Westerner would say. Take a look at the Japanese blogosphere. There’s lots of articles that mention American, U.K., and Australian governments are using this issue solely as political leverage.
- Jap: Rabid in response to the rabidness. Many of the articles on this matter make it look like the people in Taiji are a part of a creepy, criminal organization.
- Yank: Well, a few of the fishermen did say they would kill O’Barry if Japan were an unlawful country. The Japanese TV press have described the O’Barry crew as “謎の外国人” (unknown, suspicious foreigner).
- Jap: Seriously, they were trespassing their property and their livelihood without a permit.
- Yank: But a question. Why would Taiji completely shut down their cove to outsiders? Dolphin culling is legal after all correct?. It makes it look like they’re hiding something.
- Jap: Again, Taiji has had a tradition of whale and dolphin harvest. There’s no reason to shut out outsiders from their own country; if the Western environmental / sensational / egalitarian and bizarrely anthropomorphic demographic weren’t so colonial in their “heroic” and “moral” endeavors, maybe the Taiji folks would have been more open to begin with.
- Yank: That was then, this is now.
- Jap: If the PETA folks were caught taping videotapes inside a slaughterhouse, they would be the ones slaughtered.
- Yank: Now, I disagree that slaughterhouses are equivalent to the dolphin culling. It is better compared to running a herd of wild bison off the top of a cliff.
- Jap: I also disagree that slaughterhouses are different from dolphin culling, but in a different way. I’d say the methods of culling are highly calibrated and efficient, built on years of experience. The people that harvest the dolphins put care and pride in their work, and I’d say these fishermen have even more respect for the species than the people keening for a ban.
- Yank: Methods like banging metal poles to confuse the super sensitive sonars to herd dolphins to an unknown habitat while slitting the dolphin open as they struggle for several minutes afterwards?
- Jap: If the dolphin culling is simply cruel, I’m sure the backlash from the Japanese would be great. The large rebuttal that’s always created from the Japanese isn’t just craziness. Whenever the environmentalists talk about this issue, they always step over something crucial to the Japanese mindset.
- Yank: Like?
- Jap: Tradition.
- Yank: Meh.
- Jap: Exactly. The asymmetry of values given to tradition is what is causing this whole disconnect in the first place.
- Yank: Disconnect? Can’t we all agree that cruelty can be accepted as universally bad? It is human nature that we grimace when we see an intelligent being struggling. No amount of “tradition” can replace what remains our morality.
- Jap: I would go far as to say that it isn’t necessary “moral” to curtail the livelihoods of people that have lasted a dynasty.
- Yank: Remember whaling in the 1850s? The U.S. had as much as 70,000 people catching whale blubber. I’m sure there was a lot of romance in whaling, whether it be for the adventure or just the fact that they wanted to get out of land. But the U.S. promptly stopped.
- Jap: Or maybe it was just because of the money. It’s easy to stop whaling when there are shiny new things like oil wells appearing on land. Where the American whalers only extracted oil, the Japanese whaling industry used every part of the whale — similar to what the Native Americans did with the buffalo. The meat can be used as food, the oil that comes off from the skin, bones, innards can be used as fuel or fertilizer and the skin itself can be used as food or fertilizer.
- Yank: And the current economic demand for all of those are?
- Jap: Just because the demand has decreased or have gone close to nil, doesn’t mean to stop the process altogether. Economic thinking may make it optimal to stop the process, but not all people think or decide in that framework.
- Yank: Stubborn much?
- Jap: I think in some ways, being “Western”, or being the front bearers of science, revolutions in technology and industrialization, spread of secularism and rationalism, the moral guidelines are an antithesis to “tradition.” It may be natural to be changed or change other cultures based on new ideas, but people that treasure redundancy and dynastic inheritance will be very reluctant or even offended by forced change no matter how much it “makes sense.”
- Yank: I think Japan is plenty progressive.
- Jap: Yes, in parts, after WWII.
- Yank: Again, what do you mean by “tradition?” We do live in the 21st Century hello.
- Jap: First of all, the word, “食文化”(food culture) may only be used by anthropologists and foodies in the English culture, but it is frequently seen in the Japanese press, TV shows, the marketplace and casual conversations at an izakaya; it is deeply integrated into the Japanese heritage (Bestor 2004). For example, food comes in conjunction with most celebratory occasions. There is toshikoshi soba on New Year’s Eve, ozouni, mochi, osechi on New Year’s Day, tai during weddings, sekihan for celebratory occasions, etc. If you ever have dinner at a Japanese (or you could even generalize to East Asian) household, you’ll notice that people there are a lot more anal about what they cook for that day and what the visitor thinks of their meal. Food is one of the ways to send messages for the accompanying situation. Are there any such traditions in the U.S.?
- Yank: Beer, I guess. There’s a lot of variety in each household so it’s hard to generalize.
- Jap: Traditional Japanese cuisine is largely based on “素材を活かす” (to bring the ingredient to life), or simply, utilizing the ingredient to its maximum potential using simple to minimal alterations; therefore, there exists large emphasis on seasonality, locality, quality of the ingredients, and its presentation. It is not uncommon to hear a casual person looking forward to eat sanma or matsutake at the start of autumn, or takenoko during the spring. Every local town boasts their own “郷土料理” (regional/local culinary specialities) or a commodified food product only available in the local area (raw caramel, salad bread, etc.). Many travel within the country just to taste the local flavor and to bring them back via an “お土産” (souvenir). The cooking methods and the ingredients are strongly local in its nature, and thus, taking away a distinct part of their repertoire (Taiji and whaling have a 400+ year history) is almost an insult to its character. Contrast that to French cuisine which will stuff shit down into any duck and call it voilà!, or whatever.
- Yank: Doesn’t that breed food nationalism, and therefore, a blind eye to the dolphin problem? It also sounds like those concerns are just for the elite.
- Jap: Traditionally, there’s been a strong distinction between washoku (Japanese food) and yoshoku (Foreign food) (Bestor 2004). In addition to the aforementioned points on the ingredients, raw seafood is looked at as one of the pillars of authentic Japanese cuisine.Where “normal” countries look at food and think cooked food, the average Japanese include uncooked foodstuffs in their space. Go to an aquarium and only the Japanese will look at any of the displays and ponder if they can eat it. Rice is also a pillar, where non-Japanese rice is looked down upon because it doesn’t gel with the Japanese palate and their ability (and habit) to detect the shades of gray in quality. The famous rice shortage in 1994 caused the Japanese government to actually import Thai, Indian, Californian, etc. rice and there was a major portion of the population that refused to eat it (yes, partially for nationalistic reasons). A lobster trader in Europe stopped selling to Tsukiji after being notified that its lobsters weren’t aligned and packaged neatly enough for the Japanese consumers. There is a significant difference between the food presentation when it’s put through Japanese vs. foreign hands, and people are comfortable with the former — via the logic of better presentation => better quality. So yes, there is nationalism. But take it out and life would be boring.
- Yank: Food culture changes and constantly evolves. The current version of sushi as we know it didn’t come until refrigeration techniques (mid-20th Century?). Until the introduction of beef from Western cultures, toro was simply cat food. Many of the baby-boom generation don’t even know how to cook traditional Japanese food. The younger generation are probably oblivious to local foodstuffs, as everything is available at the supermarket or convenience store. BTW, carpaccio is raw.
- Jap: What I’m trying to say is, even if we forgo the strong local connections and the semi-arbitrary distinctions between Japanese and “foreign” food, there is an omnipresent part of the Japanese mind that attaches food with identity. See the demand for TV shows, magazines, books, internet articles, websites, mangas pertaining to food and the integration of “gourmet” reporting and food tasting during serious news hours; it’s difficult to stray from this mindset even for the young generation. Contrast that with the “Western” mindset of looking at food as, well, “food.”
- Yank: You don’t think, say, vegetarianism will spread as much as the liberal West because it’s too precious to not eat dolphins or Matsuzaka beef?
- Jap: The cultural biographies of the ingredients and the dishes are too extensive to let go. It’s one of the reasons (IMO) that major chain restaurants (aside from cheap ones) like Applebees won’t supplant the local independent places like it does in the U.S.
- Yank: So how can countries agree on a compromise on the whaling/dolphin issue? It sounds like banning would be a near impossibility.
- Jap: I think it is a near impossibility as it currently stands (even the Communist Party is supportive of whaling). There is tons of political and bureaucratic baggage in the “commercial” whale and dolphin sales.
- Yank: Mislabeling the dolphins as whales, and the cover up of the mercury issue.
- Jap: Except that technically, dolphins are whales, just categorized as such because they’re small. I think mercury is a bloated issue thanks to big mouthers like Jenny McCarthy, Oprah and Bill Maher.
- Yank: But they should check their levels and label them appropriately because we don’t want pregnant women and children poisoned.
- Jap: Sure, although I doubt anybody would eat that much to have an effect. But in general, once the young generation takes over in 20 to 40 years, the Japanese would be a lot more responsive to outside opinion.
- Yank: The anti-anti-whaling arguments are getting more fierce and constructive as well (Blok 2008). Just like you said that mass media contributes a large part to Japan’s identification with food, it could be used to fan the flames of nationalistic fervor in defending whaling. Part of a master plan to repeal the commercial ban on whaling.
- Jap: I think a lot of Japanese would agree with that sentiment.
- Yank: Japan also buys off small-island countries that don’t give a shit about whaling to increase the number of pro-whaling countries at the IWC.
- Jap: Yes, that sucks. But remember, the IWC was originally comprised of 15 whaling states and both pro and anti-whaling countries have been accused of vote-buying since (Wowk 2009).
- Yank: It started off around 3:1 ratio for the anti-whaling countries, but now it’s more like 1:1.
- Jap: Part of the problem is the institutional structure of the IWC. Amendments to the Convention are near impossible as it requires vote unanimity; therefore, the easiest way to gain power within the IWC is to vote-buy the Amendments to the Schedule. Basically, it does not foster cooperation, but only division (Wowk 2009).
- Yank: Lack of enforcement is also concern, as 25K whales have been killed since the moratorium and many of them are taken illegally. This is not a problem unique to whales, but it doesn’t excuse the unregulated whaling by Japan and other countries.
- Jap: It also doesn’t excuse hypocritical U.S. that allows a significant quota to Alaskan fishermen while appeasing the environmentalists in the lower 48s. Seriously, what’s the difference between Taiji and coastal communities in Alaska again?
- Yank: It doesn’t change the fact that Japan is the biggest whaling country and it is most responsible for the current status on whales.
- Jap: I would go as far to say the commercial whaling ban of the IWC is restricting cooperation between the nations, therefore, resulting in an increase of illegal whaling.
- Yank: How are the general opinions on whaling as it currently stands?
- Jap: Here are the polling done by the government (that breaks it down by gender and age class) in 2002: 85% are cognizant of the whaling problem, 89% know that whales were once used as lunch meat before the commercial ban, 88% have had whale meat before (Author’s note: wow, really?), 24% knows about the whaling issues well, 58% know that whales are looked at like humans in other countries, 23% say whaling should be banned (53% said no, this number decreases for the younger generation), 81% say scientific whaling is necessary.
- Yank: Hmm. According to GreenPeace (2008), 31% favored whaling, 25% opposed, and 44% had no opinion. 40% didn’t know that whale from research was sold.
- Jap: Different methodologies.
- Yank: Anyways, is “The Cove” going to be shown in Japan?
- Jap: At least at the Tokyo International Film Festival, after a large push from environmentalists.
- Yank: Taiji looks like it’s going to sue for the documentary.
- Jap: Not too surprising. The fishermen described the filmmakers as eco-terrorists.
- Yank: The exposure is good.
- Jap: I think the exposure is good, only if it leads to constructive discussion. I’m not sure “The Cove” accomplishes the latter. The documentary has a bunch of misleading facts and representations. For example, the 23K “slaughters” (not just in Taiji) seems like a lot, but insignificant from a population perspective. I mean, this whole whaling issue (including the IWC) is so damn politicized, “The Cove” is just adding to the fodder. If the anti-whalers don’t tone down the rhetoric of trying to meddle with issues of other countries, there will never be a compromise. I’ll guarantee you that much.
- Yank: Tradition and opinion changes constantly. Japan a few decades ago didn’t consider cats as domestic until the people changed their minds, implementing values from other cultures. I’d say the same thing will happen with the dolphins.
…
- Yank: Good discussion, what’s our next movie?
- Jap: “No More Sushi,” err, “End of the Line” of course.
- Yank: On over-fishing, another large problem that the Japanese are largely responsible for. Even the French are banning the harvest of bluefin tuna. WTH is Japan doing?
- Jap: Cutting it by 20%. We’ll see how the new government is different from the previous ones.
- Yank: 20% is seriously not enough from the biggest harvester.
- Jap: You know what a good business opportunity would be?
- Yank: What.
- Jap: A sustainable sushi restaurant.
- Yank: Ah, one in Seattle.
- Jap: Yay, change via young Japanese.
Refs:
- Aron, et al. Scientists versus Whaling: Science, Advocacy, and Errors of Judgement. BioSciences. Dec 2002. Vol. 52. No. 12. 1137-1140.
- Bestor, Theodore. Tsukiji: the fish market at the center of the world.
- Blok, Anders. Contesting Global Norms: Politics of Identity in Japanese Pro-Whaling Countermobilization. Global Environmental Politics. May 2008. Vol. 8. No. 2. 39-66.
- Clapham, et al. Whaling as Science. BioSciences. March 2003. Vol. 53. No. 3. 210-212.
- Wowk, Kateryna. Failings of the International Whaling Commission: A Result of Institutional Design. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISA’s 50th ANNUAL CONVENTION “EXPLORING THE PAST, ANTICIPATING THE FUTURE”, 2009-10-28.
Author’s Note: I tried to implement as much talking points on this issue as much as possible, but in general, this hypothetical can be biased because of my opinion that dolphin harvest (and whaling) should basically be an ecologically sustainable, open and scientific process. And yes, this was generally written for the English-speaking audience.
oops, I dumped all the comments