Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Iceland going back to hunting whales

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Just heard on the news they are going to start hunting whales for apperantly scientific purposes - to see if they affect fishing stocks BUT many say this is a first step towards full scale commerical hunting.
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    thats such an excuse, the know what happens when whales are wiped out! duh! and why do they need to hunt whales in this day and age, theres plenty of other food/energy sources around, why cant they leave the whales alone :crying:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Japan is already allowed to catch a number of whales "for scientific research".

    The only research the Japanese seem to be conducting is whether whale meat tastes best with sake or soy sauce.

    These two countries (and Finland) have been waging a tireless campaign to remove the moratorium on whale hunting. One of the many tricks they have done is to offer vast amounts of money to small states and principalities if they change their vote on the issue of the moratorium.

    If there was ever a good case for a commercial and cultural boycott of a country, this is it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin


    If there was ever a good case for a commercial and cultural boycott of a country, this is it.

    Stupidity will continue to rule.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Do you happen to have a grudge against boycotts then Jacqs? Or do you mean them?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They won't stop anything cause of a boycott.
    They have no purpose at all.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jacq
    They have no purpose at all.

    Shouldn't that be "porpoise"? :lol: [/crap sea-mammal related joke]
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    yes, it was crap :p

    Btw, is your sig by any chance inspirated by RHCP?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
    Btw, is your sig by any chance inspirated by RHCP?

    No, more from my "Dirty Old Man" ID and the Electric Six song "Gay Bar"... Sadly I could see the humour in it...

    So, back on topic, do you think that boycott's don't achieve anything?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
    They won't stop anything cause of a boycott.
    They have no purpose at all.

    Boycotts have a purpose, and a good one.

    They allow ordinary people to protest and apply pressure when they feel not enough is being done to correct a situation.

    Some boycotts are successful but the majority don’t achieve much, simply because not enough people join in.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I want to hear of a boycott that has achieved it's goal fully.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Shell boycott which resulted in the Brent Spa not being sunk off the UK coast.

    Of course, Greenpeace now admit that their information was incorrect, but hey they got their way...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Man Of Kent
    Shell boycott which resulted in the Brent Spa not being sunk off the UK coast.

    Of course, Greenpeace now admit that their information was incorrect, but hey they got their way...

    Where they burnt it instead?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's difficult to know to which degree, but I have no doubt that the economic and cultural boycott of South Africa accelerated the end of the Apartheid.

    Boycotts do work if enough people join in. Most of the ones that succeed are over trivial matters, such as Argos being boycotted until they withdrew a 'sexy' line of children's underwear from stock. The biggest one I can think of is the one MoK mentioned.

    There is a boycott of Esso (prop. Exxon) service stations afoot because of the company's disgusting plans for oil drilling in the Artic, but only a few people observe it. If the boycott was to be observed properly throughout the world you can bet your bottom dollar Exxon would drop their plans to drill in the Artic faster than you can say "oil barons are scum".

    It is easier to successfully boycott a company than a whole country. But even if the boycott has little chance of success it is a question of general principle.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
    Where they burnt it instead?

    From what I can remember, it was taken to Norway and cut up.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    why boycott iceland for whalehunting when Britain has widescale cattle, pig and chicken slaughter every day of the week. Im sorry I dont see the difference. As long as its not an endangered whale, then there is no difference apart from its a different species, The Icelanders EAT whale, like we eat chickens, just because Britons as a nation dont eat whales doesnt mean other people shouldnt. Different countries eat whatever meat they have in plentiful supply, Australians eat crocodiles and kangaroos, we eat pigs and cows, icelanders eat whales. whoopee shit.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I thought Rainbow the whole issue revolves around the argument that whales are endangered species. Or so believe all the nations in the world bar three.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Some species of whale are endangered, but Greenpeace would have everyone believe that all whales are. Minkie Whales, the species in question here, are most certainly not endangered and havent been for the past 10 years the moratorium has been in place.

    Seems that Greenpeace along with several governments of the time essentially ignored scientific data confirming that Minkie Whale hunting would not threaten the population at all.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    .
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    this type of thing one makes me very sad and two makes me very angry because what if the animals suffer? i wonder
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by mocha_1977
    this type of thing one makes me very sad and two makes me very angry because what if the animals suffer? i wonder
    Well yes Im sure they do suffer. You wont find me arguing that they dont. my argument is that its hypocritical for this country to say that Iceland should ban whaling, when we kill plenty of animals ourselves. Britain wouldnt be particularly impressed if Iceland decided that we shouldnt kill any more cows. I dont buy that slaughterhouses are a humane and nice way of killing animals, yet a harpoon in the head is barbaric. Theyre both barbaric if you ask me. I do eat meat, but im not kidding myself that its a nice industry.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why do they need the meat? They could make FAR more money out of tourists watching the whales. Doesn't even make good business sense. Stupid people.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    its not entirely to do with the whale meat apparently. its to do with the whales effect on icelands fish stock.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why do people love whales so much?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by TellMeWhoAreYou
    Why do people love whales so much?

    Because they're beautiful and intelligent creatures. Plus they're gonna get extinct if we're not careful.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A lot of people up here (me included) may be supporting this because of the silly threats we have received. This year 38 whales will be killed instead of 100. But I think overall the plan is to hunt 250 whales in two years, possibly lower with the decrease. Japan has been whaling for a long time now. Norwegians are whaling. And even the Americans are whaling. And what happens when a nation small enough to not be able to resist a boycott does something they don't like? Then they start picking on us. That little fact makes me really annoyed.

    I don't like the "scientific" cover up though. We should just say that we are intending to start whaling again. Some whale species are endangered, but not all. And what they are whaling now is (I think) the most common whale to be seen around Iceland.

    I can't see anything against whaling as long as we are not whaling the endangered ones and try to keep it as humane as possible. Not much different from other type of hunting if you ask me.

    And someone mentioned making money off tourists instead. Trust me, the whale watching people are enraged indeed. ;)

    And if someone has not noticed, then I am Icelandic.:p :D
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Unfortunately hyprocrisy happens in life, rainbow brite, however i do see what you mean, i just was making the point that i thought this decision was sad that was all!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by TellMeWhoAreYou
    Why do people love whales so much?

    It's the mountains and the fact that the men have such wonderful singing voices, I guess...

    [/second crap gag of the thread]
    Originally posted by QWST
    wasn't that the one that was less environmentally damaging to sink it and leave it there instead of dismantling it?

    Yep, thats the one. Undermined much of the good work Greenpeace does.
    Originally posted by rainbowbrite
    You wont find me arguing that they dont. my argument is that its hypocritical for this country to say that Iceland should ban whaling, when we kill plenty of animals ourselves. Britain wouldnt be particularly impressed if Iceland decided that we shouldnt kill any more cows. I dont buy that slaughterhouses are a humane and nice way of killing animals, yet a harpoon in the head is barbaric. Theyre both barbaric if you ask me. I do eat meat, but im not kidding myself that its a nice industry.

    I don't think it is hypocritical at all. The difference is that we breed the cows as a food source. Iceland isn't breeding whales, at least not to my knowledge.

    I don't think that people object to the slaughter of whales because it is barbaric so much as the fact that whales are an endangered species. Well, that would be my reasoning anyway.

    Out of interest, I think the biggest threat to Icelandic fish stocks are the trawlers themselves, rather than the whales.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Minkie whales are not one of the endangered species of whales, MoK.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    Minkie whales are not one of the endangered species of whales, MoK.

    Soon will be tho' ;)

    Actually, yeah I know that there are over 50,000 of them. In this instance Iceland wants to take 250 per year (or something like that) and so the impact on the minkie population will be minimal. By the same token, the positive impact on the Icelandic eco system will also be minimal, so why will they do it?

    Personally, I think that this is the thin edge of the wedge and should be prevented on that basis. We would want to see precendence set, would we?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Personally I have a bigger issue with Greenpeace conveniently disregarding scientific evidence (as they did over a decade ago on the the Minkie whale population) whenever it suits them, or more rightly, when the evidence shows their claims of endangerment are nothing more than hot air.

    In the case of Norway, these fishing villages happen to depend very highly on the controlled culling both for the whale meat itself as well as the other by products of their catch, all of which are used to support the local community.

    And no, these villages do not have ready alternatives as they are largely in the far northern region inside the polar circle.
Sign In or Register to comment.