Tweet
The following almost made sense to me, until they used the argument that since anti-whaling countries don't plan on resurrecting commercial whaling they don't see the need to kill whales.
Yeah, well...! 
4. The US, UK, Australia and others say that it is not necessary to kill whales to study them. Why doesn't Japan use non-lethal research methods?
The purpose of Japan's whale research is to gather scientific data required to establish a management regime for the sustainable use of whale resources. For this purpose some indispensable data have to be collected by lethal means, which simply cannot be obtained by non-lethal means. JARPA II is therefore a combination of lethal and non-lethal research. Lethal research provides internal organs such as ovaries, ear plugs and stomach contents essential for population and ecosystem modeling. Since the US, UK, Australia and other anti-whaling countries have no intention at the present time to resume commercial whaling they have no need for the kind of scientific data required to establish a management regime for the sustainable use of whale resources. That is why they say it is possible to do whale research without killing whales.
And more:
Q5. Why does Japan continue its research whaling in the face of contrary world opinion and in contradiction to the moratorium on commercial whaling?
In fact, anti-whaling is not "world opinion" ? rather, it is a predominantly Western phenomenon in developed countries amplified by anti-whaling fundraising NGOs and the Western media. Almost half of the IWC members support the sustainable use of whale resources.
With respect the moratorium on commercial whaling (which was intended as a temporary measure to provide time for the collection and analysis of further scientific data) it is important to note that Article VIII begins with the words "Notwithstanding anything in this Convention..." meaning that the moratorium on commercial whaling does not apply to research whaling. The same Article ends with the words: "...the killing, taking and treating of whales in accordance with the provisions of this Article shall be exempt from the operation of this Convention".
Q6. Why is Japan killing whales in the IWC Antarctic Sanctuary and in waters claimed by Australia and designated as a sanctuary under Australian domestic law?
The IWC sanctuary in the Antarctic applies to commercial whaling only. It does not apply to research whaling conducted under Article VIII of the ICRW. Article VIII begins with the words "Notwithstanding anything in this Convention...", meaning that neither the moratorium on commercial whaling nor the sanctuary in the Antarctic Ocean applies to research whaling. The IWC Sanctuary in the Antarctic was adopted without any recommendation from the Scientific Committee that it was required for conservation purposes.
Further, at the 2004 meeting of the Scientific Committee, invited outside experts strongly criticized IWC sanctuaries as an approach to conservation. Their conclusions were that IWC sanctuaries are not ecologically justified, that they are based on vague goals and objectives, that they lack a rigorous approach to design and operation, that they represent a "shotgun" approach to conservation and, that they are more prohibitive than precautionary.
In regards to Australia's designated sanctuary, many countries including the U.S. and Japan do not recognize Australia's Antarctic claim. The Antarctic Treaty, to which Australia is a member, freezes all Antarctic claims. From the perspective of the international community therefore, Australia's claim and its sanctuary in Antarctic waters, which it has declared under its domestic legislation, has no legal standing in international law and therefore no effect.
Q7. Is it possible to kill whales humanely?
In fact, a large proportion of the whales taken are killed instantly by an explosive harpoon and for those cases when they are not, a secondary killing method (a second harpoon or high caliber rifle) ensures that the time to death is as rapid as possible. These two methods were introduced to ensure the most efficient and humane killing. The IWC has said that the explosive harpoon is the most effective method for killing whales and significant improvements to the humaneness of the hunt have been achieved. Instantaneous death and time to death of less than two minutes for whales is far better than the killing of most other wildlife.
Q8. Would the transport of meat from humpback whales from the Antarctic to Japan be a violation of CITES rules?
Definitely not. Although humpback whales are listed on Appendix I of CITES and transport from the Antarctic would constitute "trade" under CITES rules, the trade restrictions applicable to CITES listed species apply only when such trade is primarily for commercial purposes. In this case, Japan, which is solely responsible for such determination, has clearly stated that the primary purpose is for scientific purposes not for commercial purposes.
Q9. Why doesn't Japan respond positively to the political pressure from its major trading partners and otherwise friendly countries?
Japan has received political representations from a number of countries urging a change in its whaling policy. The difference of views on the whaling issue has not affected and should not affect the overall good relationship Japan has with these countries. However, the fact that we have a difference of view does not mean that Japan should change its position. These countries do not have the right to impose their ethical or moral values on Japanese as long as whales are sustainably utilized fully consistent with international law and science. Mutual respect for differences, not political coercion, is the solution to this difficult issue.
Japan embraces a long history of sustainable utilization of whale products as a source of food. Taking into account the growing uncertainty of the world's food supply and its trade, resumption of sustainable use of abundant whale resources as one of the means to acquire animal protein is of vital importance for the future, not only for Japanese people but also for other food deficit countries.
Q10. Why did Japan agree to postpone its take of humpback whales in the Antarctic?
Japan agreed to postpone the take of humpback whales at the request of the Chairman of the IWC as long as it views that progress is being made toward the normalization of the IWC considering that it is important at this critical moment to avoid overly emotional responses from anti-whaling countries. In March 2008 the IWC will hold a special meeting to discuss the future of the IWC. Japan, as the current vice-chair, agreed to the request from the Chair of the IWC in the hope that it would contribute to a successful outcome for this meeting.
)
Comment