===== A message from the 'makahwhaling' discussion list ===== FROM WASHINGTON CITIZEN'S COASTAL ALLIANCE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- We welcome all new subscribers to this list. We have been inundated with requests from people who wish to receive these updates, and we thank you for your efforts to prevent the Makah from killing again. It is important to remember that thanks to the Clinton/Gore administration, the Makah will be able to kill five whales EACH YEAR through 2002, so please take action now! We will continue to provide you with news, information and the most effective ways of halting the whale killers NOW! Subscribers: please forward any news items regarding the Makah's ongoing whale killing from YOUR region to: dano@rockisland.com This update is quite lengthy, but contains information that answers many of the questions you have asked us, including DETAILS of the Makah Nation's plan to resume commerical whaling. ***** FROM PROGRESSIVE ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- May 19, 1999 Contact: Will Anderson, PAWS Wildlife Advocate, (425) 787-2500 ext. 841 Makah waste and disgrace whale Makah abandon whale, leave butchering to NMFS and Alaska Inuit Shortly after 7 am Monday, May 17, the Makah killed a gray whale. Nearly 24 hours later abandoned meat and blubber sat rotting on the beach in Neah Bay. Graphic video documentation shows a frustrated National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) biologist and Alaskan Inuit asking where the Makah had gone. After most of the media had departed, two people quietly documented four hours of activity after midnight the morning of May 18. They watched as an NMFS biologist, in an attempt to protect the whale carcass from being overtaken by high tide, removed its intestines, fouling the water and the whale. The Makah did not return until daylight, leaving substantial amounts of meat and blubber to decompose for more than 20 hours. International Whaling Convention (IWC) rules and domestic regulations prohibit waste of whales killed under IWC jurisdiction. The Progressive Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) and Sea Defense Alliance are holding a press conference Thursday, May 20 at 9 am to show several minutes of videotape documenting the Makah's abandonment of the gray whale. Speakers from PAWS and Sea Defense Alliance, as well as the two people who videotaped the rotting whale for four hours, will present testimony. ***** PEACEFUL PROTEST THIS COMING SATURDAY ------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Peninsula Citizens for the Protection of Whales and the Sea Defense Alliance will hold a peaceful road demonstration this coming Saturday, May 22. The PCPW, SEDNA and other protest groups invite all of you to come join them in displaying the outrage and sorrow that so many of us feel. Please take a day to demonstrate your feelings about the Makah whalers killing a baby gray whale. All are welcome! All groups and citizens will meet at Olson's Resort in Sekiu, WA at noon this coming Saturday. Chuck Owens, head of the PCPW, states that his group is looking forward to meeting you all! Any questions? dano@rockisland.com THIS JUST IN: The PCPW and SEDNA announce a show of support and solidarity for Joshua Harper and Jacob Conroy, the first SEDNA members arrested by the U.S. Coast Guard in their defense of the gray whales. Joshua and Jacob held off the Makah whale killers in a heroic effort at sea. These gentlemen will be arraigned in Clallam County District Court tomorrow, and you are encouraged to attend and show them your gratitude. Contact: SEDNA (360) 963-2538 or PCPW (360) 780-0478. ***** GORE 2000 CAMPAIGN ------------------------------------ The WCCA spoke with the Washington, D.C. based "Gore 2000" office. They were quite aware of the Makah whale killing atrocity, but were quite uninformed about their boss' stance on the issue. Our questions were not answered to our satisfaction, but we let them know that a few thousand of our closest friends would soon be calling to educate them on this issue. You know what to do. Please let these people know that you do not, AND WILL NOT, support Al Gore in 2000, and in fact, will actively work AGAINST his campaign. Be sure to tell them of your anger and disgust at his whale killing policies, and remind them that the American people hold him responsible for the death of this 3-year old baby gray whale. As soon as you hang up, call your local and state Democratic Party office and tell them the same thing. Lastly, call Bill Bradley's campaign headquarters and encourage him to take a stand OPPOSING Mr. Gore's whale-killing policies. Tell him that you would support his campaign if he will help us ensure that this atrocity will NEVER AGAIN be visited upon the American people. Remember, both Gore and Bradley are actively campaigning in Washington state- each wants to win this state BADLY! "GORE 2000" Telephone: (202) 263-6000 "BRADLEY FOR PRESIDENT" Telephone: (973) 731-2100 or (888) 643-9799 ***** SEATTLE GATHERING ---------------------------------- The Sakya Monastery of Tibetan Buddhism and Orca Alliance invite you to attend A Naga Fire Puja in Honor of the Gray Whale Prayers for a Fortunate Rebirth Performed by Lama Kunga Palmo 6:30 PM, Saturday May 22, 1999 at Alki Beach in West Seattle (the sandy beach area) Please bring small pieces of wood (1/2 x 1/2 approx.) with Prayers written on them to be burned during this sacred ritual to honor the passing of this, our largest water mammal. You may also bring incense and flowers or other suitable offerings. This is a peaceful gathering and not meant to be a political statement or in any way reflective on the cultures of the tribes involved. It is held to pay homage in Tibetan Buddhism to honor the passing of a sentient being. Please call 206-324-0873 (Lama Palmo) or 206-933-0206 (Donna Sandstrom/Orca Alliance) if you have any questions about this gathering. ***** FROM BREACH MARINE PROTECTION ----------------------------------------------------------- Dear Senator Gorton, We understand you made a statement on the 18th. May, claiming that: "The Makah do have the right to hunt whales under their treaty and through the International Whaling Commission." This is blatantly untrue. Please read the following items which disprove this propaganda line espoused by the Clinton-Gore/ Makah whale murders. These are just the tip of the iceberg Senator, if you wish the full facts on Makah whaling, please don't hesitate to contact us, we will be only too pleased to help. Also, if you are genuinely against the atrocities already carried out (and there is many more to come), by the US Government's agencies and the Makah, and you are serious about wanting to stop Makah whaling permanently, then why don't you and your colleges support and sign-on to our lawsuit brought against NMFS/ NOAA? The appeal is due to be heard shortly, again, if you want details, let me know. David Smith Campaigns Director Breach Marine Protection IWC SECRETARY CONFIRMS MAKAH HUNT ILLEGAL In a letter to attorney Eric Dickman of Seattle, dated October 5, IWC Secretary Ray Gamble stated: "The IWC has specifically not passed a judgement on recognizing or otherwise the claim of the Makah Tribe, since the member nations were clearly unable to agree." The pertinent IWC ruling -- Paragraph 13(b)(2) of Appendix 11 -- reads as follows: "(2) The taking of gray whales from the Eastern stock in the North Pacific is permitted, but only by aborigines of a contracting Party on behalf of aborigines, and then only when the meat and products of such whales are to be used exclusively for local consumption by the aborigines whose traditional aboriginal subsistence and cultural needs have been recognized." The quota approved by the IWC was for a Russian aboriginal take of Gray whales, and according to the rules governing aboriginal whaling, the meat must be utilized by the Chukotka people exclusively. There is no provision for a whale quota to be traded or given to a party that does not meet the recognized subsistence need. MAKAH WILDLIFE 'PROCESSING PLANT' U.S. Government documents reveal tribe's planned kills of porpoises, minke whales & sea lions; confirm Japanese, Norwegian involvement Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Sea Shepherd Pacific Northwest Coordinator Michael Kundu, were received on October 20, pursuant to a request filed in mid-August. They date from the spring of 1995, when the Makah first approached government agencies about their intent to hunt California gray whales for "cultural and ceremonial" purposes. An e-mail dated April 3, 1995, from Michael Tillman, Deputy Commissioner at the Southwest Fisheries Science Center of the National Marine Fisheries Service, to NMFS colleague Margaret Hayes and several others, relates a conversation between Hayes and Makah legal representative John Arum, saying "Maggie informed me that Arum had told her that Japanese interests had approached the Makahs about selling whale meat to them. So I wasn't surprised when he asked me generally about commercial sale." A memo dated April 27, 1995, headed "Notes from the discussion of treaty rights during the April 1995 Pacific Scientific Review Group meeting" and hand-addressed "To: MFT" (Michael F. Tillman) "From: RLB" (Robert L. Brownell, NMFS Region 4) reads in part: "The Makah intend to harvest gray whales (starting in 1995), harbor seals (5 already taken), California sea lions, minke whales, small cetaceans such as harbor porpoise and Dall's porpoise, and potentially, in the future, sea otters. The Makah are planning to operate a processing plant so as to sell to markets outside the U.S. The Makah have started discussions with Japan and Norway about selling their whale products to both countries. The plant could be used to process the catches of other tribes as well. The Makah and other tribes plan to reduce local populations of harbor seals to one-half to one-third of current population.... There would be no limit placed on catches of California sea lions...." One week later, Makah Tribal Council Chairman Hubert Markishtum sent a formal proposal to the U.S. State Department and the National Oceanics and Atmospherics Administration notifying them of the Makah's proposal to re-establish "a ceremonial and subsistence whale hunt" as "a catalyst which would allow us to instill in our young people the traditional values which have held our people together over the centuries." **************************************************************************** MAKAH WHALING KNOWINGLY INHUMANE "Take out the brain stem and they are toast," said Allen Ingling, a Maryland so-called veterinarian and ballistics expert, who took an .577 calibre elephant gun to Neah Bay last week for the Makah to use for slaughtering California Gray whales. "Basically the magic number seems to be 15 minutes," Ingling said. "If we can kill something in less than 15 minutes, that's what we'd like to accomplish." (Seattle Times). Yet the U.S. officials who authorised the Makah Tribe to kill whales have insisted on a "humane kill". Ingling should know: apparently he's been in the killing business for years at the University of Maryland. He's devised methods of slaughtering cattle, electrocuting horses and has even worked for the past decade with Alaskan Eskimos bringing violent death to Bowhead whales. But does he? His statements, at best, show a complete ignorance of the internationally concluded criteria for whaling strike-to-death times; at worst, a blatant disregard for internationally agreed standards. The world-wide accepted definition for the 'instantaneous' death of a whale is below 10 seconds. And even at below 10 seconds, no one within those well experienced whaling nations, and friends of the Makah - Japan and Norway - has ever claimed with credibility that this slaughter is in any way humane! We believe Ingling, the Makah and the U.S. Government know this. Breach Marine Protection (BMP) opposes whaling, and fundamental moral objections to the killing of cetaceans by humans, other than for acts of veterinary humaneness or genuine subsistence (survival) need. We are opposed to all whaling (except as stated above), including that conducted under guises such as "cultural", "scientific" etc. The main (but not all) reasons for this policy are: a) whale slaughter does not meet the International Whaling Commission's Definition of Humane Killing of an animal; b) concern about the difficulty of accurately and reliably determining death or irrecoverable insensibility in a struck whale under field conditions, which may result in cases of apparently dead or insensible (to the human eye) whales that are in fact alive, sensible and cognisant; c) whales have the ability to perceive psycho-physiological pain, stress and distress, and those individuals constituting the significant proportion of whales which are not instantaneously killed or rendered irrecoverably insensible are likely to suffer long and considerably; d) the inhumane slaughter of whales, when it is not conducted to meet genuine subsistence or veterinary humaneness needs, is both unnecessary and preventable; e) the extensive global public concern about animal welfare and ethics of whaling in general; and f) that subsequent human generations deserve to inherit a better world, devoid of unnecessary violence and suffering. THE REALITY There is certain knowledge - even amongst the most ardent pro-whaling enthusiasts - that a whale is a highly evolved, sentient, cognisant animal with, at the very least, an awareness of its own life and environment. Few can doubt that a whale, being a mammal with a highly developed neurological system, is capable of perceiving stress, fear and pain similar to that experienced by humans. The International Whaling Commission (IWC) definition of 'humane killing of an animal', (IWC/44/REPHK), adopted in 1980 (IWC/33/15); and reiterated in 1992, is: 'causing its death without pain, stress or distress perceptible to the animal. That is the ideal. Any humane killing technique aims first to render an animal insensitive to pain as swiftly as is technically possible, which in practice cannot be instantaneous in the scientific sense.' "Thus a whale's death is considered humane provided it is without pain, stress or distress perceptible to the animal", says David Smith, BMP's Founder and Campaigns Director. "Conversely, it must be true that a whale's death is considered non-humane or inhumane if it occurs with any pain, stress or distress perceptible to the animal." The IWC goes further in recognising that such a definition of humane killing is an 'ideal'. Irrespective of attempts to use this qualifier as if it were a legitimate escape clause for cases of prolonged times to death, it is apparent from whaling data that humane killing is not achieved (and cannot be achieved with current knowledge) during whaling operations. Despite efforts to improve strike accuracy and slaughter efficiency, whaling industry data, Commission documents and independent corroboration clearly prove that a significant proportion of modern weapon strikes fail to instantaneously kill or render whales irrecoverably insensible. Many potentially prolonged periods of suffering are only curtailed by use of a secondary killing method. However, the electric lance is ineffective and is likely to cause extra pain and suffering in a conscious animal (IWC/47/50);, and the alternative use of rifle fire is also an ineffective method of dispatch. Neither satisfy the IWC criteria laid down in their definition of 'humane killing of an animal'. Additionally, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that an apparently 'dead' whale (to the human eye) may in fact be alive and even fully sensible. Due to the significantly large and recurring proportion of non-instantaneous and prolonged times to death (which fail to satisfy the IWC's criteria for humane killing) intrinsic to the slaughter of whales, there is no alternative other than to conclude that whaling, in general, is inhumane. It follows that those who conduct and support whaling must therefore consider inhumane killing to be acceptable. "Governments and others who justify and condone the inhumane slaughter of whales are, in effect, choosing to ignore their moral - and hence ethical - responsibility toward preventing the infliction of pain and suffering on animals. Put simply, they are failing their 'duty of care'." "The actions of these Governments are tantamount to State institutionalisation of an inhumane slaughter practice and state sponsored terrorism of animals which would not be ethically acceptable or legally permissible within a majority of modern progressive nations if it occurred in an abattoir for domestic livestock. Then why then is it legal, or acceptable, at sea?" said Smith. Breach Marine Protection, in certain knowledge that whaling, including all its various guises, when carried out for reasons other than for acts of veterinary humaneness or genuine subsistence (survival) need, is a major, premeditated and deliberate cause of unnecessary animal suffering. Which ever way you call it, it is impossible to conclude that whaling is any other but inhumane. Breach Marine Protection 3, St. John's Street Goole East Yorkshire UK email: BreachEnv@aol.com Tel/Fax: +44 1405 769375 http://hometown.aol.com/breachenv/home.htm *****