Apparently Korea is contemplating doing some limited whaling along the coast of Korea for scientific purposes. According to this article by Richard Black for BBC:
Hunting would take place near the Korean coast on minke whales. How many would be caught is unclear.
The South Korean delegation to the International Whaling Commission (IWC) said the research was needed “for the proper assessment of whale stocks”.
[...]
Given that fact, “we believe that scientific whaling on this stock borders on the reckless,” New Zealand’s delegation head, Gerard van Bohemen said.
But Joon-Suk Kang, the head of the South Korean delegation, said the programme was necessary to answer questions about minke whale stocks that non-lethal research had been unable to solve.
But why is this research needed you ask?
The Koreans’ eventual stated aim is to prepare the ground for a resumption of “coastal whaling” – a rather vague concept that Japan is also pursuing, and that would see whale hunting return as a normal activity.
Of course, there are also the claims that the whales are eating too many fish and depriving Korean fishermen of their livelihood. ABC reports:
“As a result, fishermen in this area are consistently calling for limited whaling,” it said.
“This is because they are experiencing disturbances in their fishing activities due to frequent occurrences of cetaceans in their fishing grounds and an increasing number of minke whales are eating away large amount of fish stocks which should be consumed by human being.”
There are other reasons including the need to provide whale meat for that small part of the population that craves it needs it because it is a part of Korea’s tradition (?). According to this article by AFP, Mr. Kang provides the answer:
South Korea’s head envoy Kang Joon-Suk said consumption of whale meat “dates back to historical times” in his country and that the minke whale population had recovered since a 1986 global moratorium went into effect.
“Legal whaling has been strictly banned and subject to strong punishments, though the 26 years have been painful and frustrating for the people who have been traditionally taking whales for food,” he told the conference.
On the other hand, it could also be because of its reputed health benefits. While there may have been a small number of Koreans who consumed whale meat during the Joseon period – they were not actively harvested. One of the earliest whaling operations in Korea by the Russians took place in 1889. It is to my understanding that it was the Japanese who really got whale meat consumption by Koreans going after Korea was annexed.
We have talked about whaling on The Hole before – Koreans and Whale meat MH. April 16, 2012
(HT – Year of the Dragon, Hamel and anyone else on The Hole who feels slighted – said with a smile)
{ 70 comments… read them below or add one }
Don’t the cliff murals in Ulsan indicate that whale meat consumption dates back to PRE-historical times?
I guess this tells us what the Korea—Japan intel pact is all about—they ain’t looking for North Korean subs. They’ll looking for whales.
Anyway, it’s a shame Paul Watson’s being detained in Germany, because seriously, I’d pay good money to watch the Sea Shepherds go up against the Korean Coast Guard.
I am not denying that whale hunting took place in Korea’s historical past – I think even the accounts of Hamel mention whaling, but I don’t think it played a large part in Korean society.
I think it was wrong to tell people what they can and can’t eat – when the foods they are eating are replenishable. Are whales that replenishable?
HT to YOTD ?? (Open Thread comment #267)
Well – if you like – but to be honest, I found this through a perusal of the news and…as the links indicate….I have had an interest in whaling in Korea for a great many years. But what the heck
HT to Year of the Dragon
hey, HT to me? I texted the story to Koehler as soon as I saw it!
Whale meat?
I have met many people from Pusan who say that it is delicious; however, they recommend you start with the appetizer.
The arguments for whaling made in that article are all illogical.
…or rather, in those articles.
What I wonder is: is there some kind of massive groundswell of public support for whaling down in Yeongnam? Otherwise, what would possess the ROK gov to go this way? The poor folks over at KOCIS and the Committee on Nation Branding must be pulling their hair out.
Also, way to differentiate Korea from Japan! Wonder if they’ll now share pro-whaling propaganda and PR firms…
hahaha!
I was busy posting a reply to your replies on another thread
(http://www.rjkoehler.com/2012/07/04/yes-ive-been-too-busy-to-post-about-yet-another-english-teacher-drug-bust/#comment-468544
It helps explain why Greenpeace representatives were not allowed into the country this year.
This news made the front page of the Australian news MX papers which can handed out for free in the CBD.
Title being the pun of “Seoul Destroying”…
Land of the Morning Calm* (*please excuse all the blood in the water). How to effectively harpoon a ‘nation brand’. Lead story on TV news here in Oz.
If this article is any indication then yes, it’s already happening.
The ROK started moving into the awkward position of adopting a pro-Japanese stance on whaling in 2009 when it announced that if Japan was allowed Minke quotas by the IWC then it wanted them too.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/03/11/idUSLB933270
The ROK is now apparently adopting Japan’s spurious pro-whaling arguments: “Whales eat our fish,” a PR line Japan has been pushing to IWC members for some time now, and of course the “Whaling is our culture” propaganda. While whaling is a part of very limited regional culture (e.g. Kayoi, which even has ancient whaling shrines) it isn’t part of traditional Japanese culture. In fact it was Gen. MacArthur who gave the Japanese their taste for whale meat and made it a comfort food for today’s nostalgic nationalists. Post war Japan needed protein and schoolkids grew up with it in their lunches.
Whaling certainly isn’t traditional Korean culture but I don’t know enough about Ulsan’s reputed whaling culture to say if it’s on par with Kayoi. I doubt it but Ulsan Whaling festival planners certainly think so. This issue came up last year in incidentally.
http://www.rjkoehler.com/2011/06/15/ulsan-whale-festival-to-cater-to-drunk-whales/#comment-420883
Watching the story on CNN now…pretty much paints Koreans as pre historic barbarians. The bad press is not going to be offset by the joy of a few ajusshi gnawing on barbecued whale fat. Better just stick to the samgyupsal with that soju.
Dogs, whales, great. Vive la nation of defending outdated gluttony at the cost of so much.
We have the usual national defenders of bogus culture here on the site.
Anyway, shared miliatary intelligence with Japan down the toilet, solidarity in some crappy thing like this, grreat!!!!!!!
A purported ban on whaling was one PR advantage Korea had on Japan. I don’t understand why it would give that up, as if eating dogs weren’t bad enough, as Yuna suggests.
Leave the whales alone, dammit!
There is nothing wrong with a controlled whale harvest. People never throw stones at the Inuit who have been harvesting whales since the dawn of time. The morons who put animal life above the providence of people are the misguided. I tried it in Japan; it was OK, but not a delicacy.
Culling Minke stocks with quotas appears to be sustainable. Common Minkes aren’t endangered.
http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/2474/0
Norway, one of the only nations to legally engage in whaling, operates a quota system for its minke hunts and apparently can’t even get enough whalers interested to fill the quotas.
http://www.thelocal.no/page/view/oslo-wants-more-done-to-save-the-whalers
Raw whale flesh is delicious. Like any other animal, if it can be caught and eaten at a rate that does not endanger the species’ survival, it’s not a problem.
@railwaycharm
My concern would be that way too many species of whales are endangered, and extinction is never good for our ecosystem that we depend on for food. Even the Minke whales aren’t numerous enough to build a sustainable hunting practices, I believe.
And it would be good to minimize suffering of any animals that we consume for food (and other cool stuff) – I particularly like the way the Norwegians use grenade-tipped harpoons (I shit you not), because it kills whales quicker and it’s fucking awesome.
I thought this BBC article by Richard Black was interesting…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18719512
And to take the same tact as the Japanese and call it ‘scientific research’, which is not the main reason, if one at all – hell, they might as well agree to call Dokdo / Takeshima ‘Those Gull-Besplatted Isles Which We Used To Care Too Much About’.
#19,
You should have looked at the quotas before bring this us: one whale every two years from the Hudson Bay-Foxe Basin population and one whale every 13 years from the Baffin Bay-Davis Strait population.
How many whales are “accidentally” caught in South Korea every year?
#24,
That’s the thing. The arguments for the hunt are such BS, I have to be opposed to it on principle, regardless of whether it could be done in a sustainable manner or not.
#14- (Whaling) “…it isn’t part of traditional Japanese culture. In fact it was Gen. MacArthur who gave the Japanese their taste for whale meat and made it a comfort food for today’s nostalgic nationalists. Post war Japan needed protein and schoolkids grew up with it in their lunches.”
Either this was a lame attempt at humor (which I didn’t get) or you must be one deluded person. Could the US Occupation forces encouraged whaling to supplement meager post-war diets? Maybe, but unlikely. But to say whaling isn’t part of the traditional culture in Japan (or Korea) is nuts.
Oops, I meant to say “Could the US Occupation forces have encouraged whaling to supplement meager post-war diets?…”
I appreciate the links from Mr. Wagner on the sustainability of minke hunting. I think the ethics of this has a lot to do with that sustainability.
…except for that odd bit about the “research.” Does anyone else find it fishy that commercial whaling needs to be dressed up as scientific research?
I don’t think we should be killing highly intelligent animals for food.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
2Mb government’s simile Japan polities bear rotten fruits.
Jeff: Is that one of your usual jokes? if so, it was lost on me.
Q: Is that a cryptic crossword clue?
policies
Soylent Green tastes good.
Today is Soylent Green day.
I love my fellow people.
Besides, the argument that minke whales are not endangered and so whaling can be sustainable is BS for a very simple reason: the population from which South Korea wants to fish (and has been fishing) is in decline and is considered threatened.
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/cetaceans/minkewhale.htm
No, I was serious about that, Hamel.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
#17: How many minkes killed in Korea? - ”fishermen from communities near the town of Ulsan who routinely snare whales in their fishing nets, accidentally or not – (kill) perhaps as many as 150 per year” – see (excellent) BBC link supplied by WK936 #23
That’s 3 a week. Probably a Mon, Wed, Fri / BBQ over the weekend kind of thing (unfortunately). Korea should seriously be looking at whale-based tourism rather than whale-based dinner parties. Whale-based tourism would be a big tick for the K-nation brand and not p-off trading partners. Oz is definitely not happy, for one.
Jeff: ok you are serious. Then that raises for me these questions:
1) how do you define the intelligence of an animal?
2) how do you measure same?
3) where do you draw the line between animals that are highly intelligent and those that are not?
Hamel doesn’t watch enough national geographic if he doesn’t know that dolphins and whales are among the smartest mammals on earth.
I understand it’s completely hypocritical since I eat most other forms of meat (dogs included), but I am opposed to the killing/consumption of whales. There is just something magical about those creatures.
Unfortunately whaling is a part of traditional culture in Korea. It has been evidenced in ancient art like 울산반구대 암각화.
Welcome back to the blog, old friend. I don’t necessarily deny that whales and dolphins are intelligent, but how we define and measure animal intelligence? What about dogs, and even octopuses? I have seen them solve some pretty complex puzzles. Are they too smart to eat? Maybe that is why I have always chosen to eschew, rather than chew, cephalopods.
We’re blaming whales for the decrease in fish stocks?
I don’t think the creature’s intelligence should factor in. Being killed and eaten sucks whether you’re a whale or a chicken. However, I’m open to the notion that we should be humane about the manner of killing our food …and it certainly seems that whales die a pretty horrible death when hunted by humans.
The concept that selective empathy and affinity with certain animals species and less with others are locally developed/evolved in isolation holds much less ground than some would like to argue. At different points in history different pockets of people might have had held locally different values but now this is becoming just impossible with the interaction and shared knowledge we have with each other as a human race.
What I find abhorrent that this issue gets used in nationalistic bristling, and find it so shameful that we always seem to be on the side that is callous to life which we deem less than ourselves.
If the overarching direction is set to lessening the suffering in general, then the discrepancy should be solved by choosing *not* than choosing to *eat* others.
Right. So it’s either all animals are fair game, or none are. Agreed?
Yes and while we are on the subject, as much as I miss so much readily available, cheap and diverse fish in Korea (grilled) when I am abroad, I do think Korea (and Japan probably more so) both have been grossly overfishing in general.
I would be willing to eat less fish as well, (I stopped eating other meat, including octopi) back in Korea, and would not mind the price increase, I think we need act in order to stop the depletion.
#46 No. The concept itself stands. It’s phenomenology. It’s empirical. In general, we have more affinity and interaction with some animals than others. That “we” is a statistical “we” across the world population, and across both geographical and temporal plane. Of course some people argue that they have a lot of affinity with a piece of log, but that person exists in much rarirty both in Korea and the US.
What I mean is that the way that concept applies across the human race is general. i.e. that average of you, a Dutchman turned Australian in Korea is less or more predisposed to abhor the thought of eating whales compared to someone else from a different background.
That’s been the claim of the Japan Whaling Assoc. and the Institute of Cetacean Research in Japan for some time. These groups lobby IWC members. They have photos of Minke’s that appear to have bellies full of fish (see first link).
http://www.whaling.jp/english/news/0309_01.html
http://www.icrwhale.org/pdf/SC-F2K-J23.pdf
Is calling someone “deluded” and “nuts” what passes for a cogent counter-argument in your opinion?
The U.S. role (through Sup. Commander, Gen. MacArthur) in Japanese commercial deep sea whaling is common knowledge. You can debate the significance of the role, but it’s no delusion. Recall that the U.S. was a whaling nation; indeed the U.S. arguably has a stronger claim to deep sea whaling culture than Japan does.
As for whether or not Japan’s regional practice of ancient coastal whaling in places like Kayoi means that proposed commercial whaling operations are part of traditional Japanese culture – there’s room for debate here as well, but calling someone “nuts” isn’t a very persuasive rebuttal. This link might be useful for you in developing your ideas. (An expert makes a case for Japanese whaling being culturally significant.)
http://animal.discovery.com/tv/whale-wars/legal-debate/culturally-significant.html
@31 & 40 I’m intrigued by the intelligence argument. Is anyone familiar with the latest info on just how smart whales are?
I recall growing up that there was a lot of speculation about human-like intelligence, language ability, lots of talk about their big brains, etc. As a kid I had a teacher play us “whale song” (eerily beautiful) in class and explain that experts thought they might be communicating. But later I recall scientists suggesting that while whales are indeed intelligent their intelligence was on par with dogs rather than humans. Has the pendulum swung back to suggestions exceptional (or at least beyond dog-like) intelligence? I’ve lost track of the debate.
Anyway, my observation is that you can divide people into two groups when it comes to their opposition to whaling. Those who oppose whaling because “it’s just wrong” – a position that is non-fact dependent (and quite legitimate imo). And those whose opposition to whaling depends on knowing some set of facts. For example arguments such as 1) whales will become extinct if we hunt them, so we shouldn’t; 2) whales are highly intelligent so they shouldn’t be hunted; 3) whales are sentient creatures with emotional intelligence, empathy, etc. who experience terror in being chased down, harpooned, etc. so we shouldn’t hunt them; 4) hunting whales is “illegal,” so they shouldn’t be hunted; etc. These arguments requires knowing things like: how many whales are there? how smart are they? how sentient? under what conditions (if any) is it legal to kill them? etc.
There’s only one group here unless you think all these people have figured out how to derive ought from is.
@50 The first group could be facing the dilema you suggest. But the second group hasn’t derived the “is” yet, have they? For example, if it is the case that whales are endangered/highly intelligent/sentient, etc., then we ought not to hunt them. This group now needs to go out and establish some facts.
Whaling is a part of historical American culture. But the whole country didn’t do it. It was mainly a New England thing i.e. a regional practice. Distinctive regional and local cultures are also a part of national culture. National culture isn’t just that which is directed top-down from centralized sources.
I don’t see why something that was originally regional in Japan wouldn’t be a part of traditional Japanese culture.
ecw: And now it is fair to introduce the idea of a nation as an imagined community.
To quote an extreme example, Ainu people in northern Hokkaido have precious little to share in the way of ancient traditions with the native Ryukyuans of Okinawa, but both are called “Japanese” because they happen to live in the polity that is now called Japan. Should all their cultural practices be labeled (and defended as) traditional Japanese culture?
Unless they’ve figured out how to derive ought from is, all the facts in the world wouldn’t distinguish them from the first group..
#49,
“That’s been the claim of the Japan Whaling Assoc. and the Institute of Cetacean Research in Japan for some time.”
Ironic considering that Japan not only over fishes, it also contributes to over fishing around the world by buying a large percentage of the catch, particularly in the Maritime provinces in Canada.
@ ecw If it’s an epistemolgical point you’re making then everyone’s in the same group including those with pro-whaling arguments but we’ve strayed far from the original point I was trying to make. (I can try to rephrase the point if it still doesn’t make sense).
Point taken on regional being in some sense part of the whole. I like Hamel’s reply to this. There’s also the coastal vs. deep water issue. If Japan proposed rights for regional fishing communities to do coastal whaling for traditional catches (minke) that were not endangered for preservation of culture reasons (US does this w/ Inuits hunting Bowhead whales in Alaska) I think that’d be a more persuasive argument than saying “whaling is our culture” so we’re going to hunt blue whales in Antartica.
Benjamin: that last argument of yours is a good one, too.
Hamel, I’m no expert on intelligence and can’t with expertise respond to your questions. But I would look at a variety of factors: brain size, brain complexity, behavior, problem solving, etc.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
hamel,
I don’t believe that national culture is purely a social construction devised by centralized authorities. It is also a collection of distinctive regional and local cultures, cultures which willfully identify with a broader grouping.
@ benjamin wagner
I was making a meta-ethical point.
I think the culture issue is irrelevant. Obviously if Japan decided to take up veganism, the same critics wouldn’t object on the grounds that fish eating is a part of traditional Japanese culture while veganism isn’t.
The only reason the culture issue is even brought up is because the critics and international bodies make allowances for various indigines for similar activities on account of culture. So they’re forced to address it and try to explain why it wasn’t really a part of the culture or why it doesn’t matter even if it was. The reason the indigines get a pass on culture is because they’re stateless, ineffectual, lack sovereignty, and can serve as clients for international bodies to erode the sovereignty of majorities and groups that still have it http://patdollard.com/2012/05/un-us-should-return-stolen-land-to-indian-tribes/
Jeff: do you feel it is okay to kill and eat octopuses?
ecw: I am not clear on what your overall point is.
It’s a good question, Hamel. I admit that I eat them, and I know that they are relatively intelligent in terms of solving fairly basic problems, but I don’t know that they would fit a broad range of criteria, e.g., are they self-aware, do they exhibit empathy, etc?
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Then it seems, Jeffrey, that despite dodging my question above, you do indeed have a set of criteria for yourself for measuring intelligence in animals. And it includes empathy, which is not consistently included in human measures of intelligence. Interesting.
Dodging? I don’t know why you call my response dodging since I told you that “I would look at a variety of factors: brain size, brain complexity, behavior, problem solving, etc.” Empathy is one of those factors, or “criteria,” if you prefer. I admitted my lack of expertise, but if I could only hold opinions on issues where I’m an expert, then I wouldn’t have many opinions.
My views are gradually developing as I learn more about the surprising intelligence of many animals. I’ve recently — over the past year or so — become very impressed by the intelligence of elephants. I’ve long been impressed by dolphin intelligence, but elephants were a surprise to me, and so are dogs as I’ve learned more about their abilities. Of course, apes are intelligent, and I’ve been impressed for some fifteen years by reports of orangutan intelligence. I could go on, but what’s the point? I think you want more than I can provide. Ask me in ten years, I might have more to say.
Or if you just want to discuss the issue over beer sometime, I’m happy to do so. I’d rather not try to discuss online because I have difficulty typing. As I grow older, my right hand grows less responsive and impairs my typing skills.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Sh**. Maybe because somebody’s spam filter comment got released or put back in the filter, my comments at #46 and #47 sound even more jumbled up than usual.
I did not know that Hammel would type his comment #45 when I typed mine comment at #46 so when I started with “Yes” at #46 I wasn’t answering his question, rather, continuing my thread of conversation.
Then, when I saw his comment at #46, I answered “NO” to his question.
Anyway, my point is, like Jefferey’s continuously developing chain of individual thoughts and knowledge on the matter, so is the rest of the world’s, and now in a very collective wayt, and to link it to a “culture” arguement in order to preserve “eating” over “life” seem to be a very nationalism defending and childish thing to do, which seems to be what Korea (and Japan in this case) do a lot.
Like Whitman, I contain multitudes: Jeffery, Jeffrey, Jefferey, Geoffrey, Geoffery, Geofferey . . . not to mention Horace, Horrace, Hoarse, Horse, Hearse, Horass, Harrass, Horus, Whore-Ass . . . plus my surname Hodges, Hodge, Rogers Rodge, Hodgers, Hodger . . . and all varieties of combinations.
Thus my sign off (not that it does much good . . .):
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
and as for likening its occurence to the frequency and openness of eating kimchi, that got to be absolute proof you are a fool.
Was offered whale meat years ago. There are lots of different ‘cuts’ so to speak. Depends on which part of the carcass the meat comes from. Tried a few different ‘cuts’ of whale meat and I have to say they tasted awful. Don’t understand why there is even a demand for the stuff. As for the Korean fishermen, they are just like the farmers, too many of them, running too small, and uneconomic operations. Imagine Hyundai trying to survive selling 100 cars a year.
Latest: South Korea not to go ahead with ‘scientific’ whaling. Phew! http://bit.ly/P1WLmX
“South Korea said to be scrapping whaling plan after outcry”
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/07/south-korea-said-to-be-scrapping-whaling-plan.html
Looks like it’s official now.
Apparently plans to begin scientific whaling are not off the table after all:
“South Korea Still Considering Resumption of Whaling,” VOA News
http://m.voanews.com/1444081.html
You must log in to post a comment.