Reykjavík Grapevine - 29.07.2011, Blaðsíða 40

40
The Reykjavík Grapevine
Issue 11 — 2011
MEDIEVAL MANUSCRIPTS – Eddas and Sagas
The ancient vellums on display.
MILLENNIUM – Icelandic art through the ages.
Phase one. Starts 23 June.
CHILD OF HOPE – Youth and Jón Sigurðsson
Tribute to the leader of the independence movement.
EXHIBITIONS - GUIDED TOURS
CAFETERIA - CULTURE SHOP
The Culture House – Þjóðmenningarhúsið
National Centre for Cultural Heritage
Hverfisgata 15 · 101 Reykjavík (City Centre)
Tel: 545 1400 · thjodmenning.is · kultur.is
Open daily between 11 am and 5 pm
Free guided tour of THE MEDIEVAL
MANUSCRIPTS weekdays at 3 pm,
except Wednesdays.
Iceland | Whaling
Iceland is often considered an envi-
ronmentally forward thinking coun-
try due to its investments in clean re-
newable energy. However, the same
country is still somehow entrenched
in the backward, economically un-
sound and diplomatically poisonous
policies of 20th century whaling.
Exactly why is Iceland so determined
to slaughter whales?
TRADITION
Open boat spear-drift whaling did not
define Iceland as a modern nation. In
fact, from the late 1800s to the middle of
the 20th century, whaling in and around
Iceland was entirely dominated by for-
eign companies (mostly Norwegian)
seeking profits from whale oil. Of course,
as market prices fluctuated and whale
stocks collapsed, these companies failed
or moved on (Tonnessen & Johnsen,
1982).
The intensity of exploitation was
clearly unsustainable and prompted
Alþingi to establish the world’s first
national ban on whaling in 1915 (Ellis,
1999).
COMPLICITY
Unfortunately, the 1948 rise of Hvalur HF
would prove Iceland to be just as com-
plicit in the decimation of cetaceans as
any other whaling country. Powered steel
ships with explosive-tipped canon-fired
harpoons had dramatically increased the
killing capacity of whalers.
The now infamous International
Whaling Commission first convened
in 1949 with Iceland as a member. Just
five years later, Icelanders were already
breaking the rules.
In 1954, the IWC officially prohibited
blue whale catches in the North Atlantic
and Iceland continued to kill them un-
til 1960 (NMFS, 1998). Today, the blue
whale remains an endangered species
due to commercial whaling.
OPPOSITION
By the 1970s, most of the large whale
species had been decimated. Increas-
ingly strict regulations were casually
subverted and activists were embold-
ened to take matters into their own
hands.
Iceland was killing undersized fin and
sei whales (both endangered) and activ-
ists responded with daring interference.
In 1979, Greenpeace volunteers became
human shields in inflatable boats by
steering between the whaling ships and
the whales. Icelandic gunners fired any-
way sending harpoons just over the ac-
tivists, and the local Coast Guard seized
the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior
(Day, 1992).
In 1986, members of the Sea Shep-
herd Conservation Society took a much
more direct approach by vandalizing a
whaling shore station and sinking two
unmanned Hvalur ships overnight in
Reykjavík harbour.
RESEARCH
The IWC eventually took stronger steps
to prevent the world’s remaining in-
dustries from systematically wiping out
all whales. After years of unsuccessful
attempts, the commission enacted a
moratorium on all commercial whaling to
begin in the 1985–86 season (following a
1972 UNEP decision).
Although Iceland voted against the
moratorium, Alþingi later agreed to ac-
cept it. Japan had other plans and con-
tinued whaling under a loophole intend-
ed for scientific research. Iceland soon
followed with ‘research’ of its own.
In 1985, Iceland’s proposed catch
was mostly minke whales and endan-
gered fin and sei whales with a limited
experimental quota for endangered blue
and humpback whales. The cost of the
government-subsidised research would
be recovered through the export and
sale of whale meat to Japan. However,
the public campaign to promote do-
mestic whale meat consumption largely
failed leaving most local supplies to spoil
or end up as animal feed (Ellis, 1999).
The USA threatened economic sanc-
tions and Greenpeace intercepted ship-
ments of whale meat in European ports.
Consumer boycotts of Icelandic fish
resulted in the loss of millions of dollars
in cancelled contracts. This combined
pressure led Iceland to stop whaling in
1989 and quit the IWC in 1992.
SUBVERSION
In 2002, determined to revive the indus-
try, Iceland made a third attempt to re-
join the commission with an objection
to the moratorium. At a special meeting,
with assistance from the IWC chairman,
Iceland’s observers were permitted to
take part in the vote. In a divided deci-
sion, Iceland effectively voted itself back
into the commission while nearly half of
the IWC objected to the procedure (IWC,
2009).
During the attempt, it was declared that
commercial whaling would not resume
until 2006. Therefore, fourteen years
after whaling ceased due to interna-
tional pressure, government subsidised
‘research’ whaling began anew in 2003.
Iceland's Marine Research Institute
(MRI) claimed that minke whales were
eating too many fish.
Formal protests were issued by Brit-
ain and over twenty other nations. Ice-
land’s own tourism industry warned of
the potential backlash. Regardless, in
2006 endangered fin whales were once
again hunted by Hvalur HF. Meat exports
to Japan resumed in 2008. The following
year, Iceland’s outgoing Fisheries Min-
ister increased whaling quotas to allow
taking up to 150 fin whales and 100 min-
ke whales annually according to MRI’s
“scientific recommendations.”
CONTRADICTION
In summary, whaling seemingly con-
tinues in opposition to the interests of
Iceland. On-going regulatory violations
are a stark contrast to national envi-
ronmental values. With such historically
negative policies and limited economic
potential it’s reasonable to doubt wheth-
er Icelanders have ever questioned the
viability and ethics of whaling as their
government supports and facilitates the
industry.
WHALING IN ICELAND
That thing in the photo. Its a whale. A dead one.
Historically Uncool
Words
Don Freeman
Photography
Skari