re: Japanese ship caught whaling

Here some whale from yesterday

quote:

---

Source?

---

Took awhile to redo the research for you. Did it once before for myself before forming my opinion. Of course watching Flipper, Free Willy, and Whale Wars is more fun but less informative.

Used National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) U.S. government, us.whales.org (usw) an anti whaling organization, and International Whaling Convention (IWC) international organization that seeks to ban Japanese whaling.

Since 2000, Japan has or is hunting fin, minke, Byrdes, sei, humpback, and sperm whales (usw).

Fin whales: (IWC) data somewhat unreliable, but estimated growth rate of 4-5% annually.
2000-2014 Japan took 18 of them (usw).

Humpbacks: IWC) very good data, estimated growth rate of 10% annually.

Byrdes: (IWC) never have been considered endangered in any way. Current Japanese quota is 25 per year (usw).

Sei: (IWC) insufficient data, current population estimate 18,200. Current Japanese quote is 90 annually (usw).

Sperm whales: No quickly obtained (IWC) data. (NOAA) estimates of population range from 200,000-1,500,000. (usw) Sperm whales have been up graded from endangered to vulnerable, and from 2000 to 2010, 56 of them have been taken by Japan.

Minkes: (IWC) Data insufficient but population may be declining, still officially listed as stable by (NOAA). Current Antarctic population (where Japan fishes them) 460,000 to 690,000. Currently Japan takes less than 500 per year, and has killed less than 10,000 in the 15 years (2000-2014) (usw). That's 667 annually or about 0.001% of population.

I'm sure my factual research has totally overcome your emotional belief. Why not form an international organization to stop the killing and consumption of cute little puppies by Asians. Hundreds of thousands more dogs are eaten than whales.

quote:

---

On top of that it takes those calves 10+ years to reach sexual maturity. This is not a species that can be sustainably hunted.

---

Once again cherry picking data!
Live 90 years, calf every 3 so (90-10)/3= 26.7 offspring. CAN be hunted sustainably!
Are you allergic to math or dishonesty promoting your agenda?

quote:

---

what's wrong with legal trophy hunters? They buy tags just like you and me, and either keep the meat or give it to the local villages and it's not like the game reserves where they hunt are letting them kill an endangered species

---

Have you seen how they do it?

It's commonly referred to as "pen hunting" because the animals they kill are typically on reserves and regularly baited. The animals are often walking over to or towards the hunter out of curiosity because they are used to approaching humans who are putting out bait or food.

frick all that nonsense about it helping the economy.

The typical hunts brings in less than $20k per hunter ... less if they are part of a poor man's discount package, and the outfitters get most of the money. And only meat animals are eaten. Lions, tigers, giraffes, zebra ... they are not eaten. That's a myth perpetrated by the safari outfitters.

Again, If you ban trophy hunting you eliminate the revenue that makes having those wild animals on your land a benefit.

And by "pen hunting" you are able to remove the older animals in the last stages of their life and generate a benefit to the ranch.

Simple Eco-tourism isn't enough to pay the bills.

What if we banned trophy hunting.

I'm not often moved to post (when I do its usually on the poli board) but these threads where people all gang up to shite on big game hunters always give me a chuckle. If you don't have any desire to do it that's your prerogative obviously but I think a lot of y'all are just grossly misinformed as to how these hunts take place. There are certainly hunters that shoot penned up rhinos and whatnot but they're in the minority. Several men in my family have killed the Big 5 and I can assure you that it's far, far more dangerous than many of you believe. A quick YouTube search will reveal dozens of near death experiences with the animals on that list. There is a reason they're singled out in their own category: they can and will hunt, kill, and in some cases eat you. They aren't usually shot out of the back of a pickup truck either, that's laughable. Dangerous game hunters are a breed apart, and if you think for even one minute that we give the tiniest of fricks what your opinion of us is then you might want to think again because I can assure you that we do not.

In fact, I don't know anyone that's done any serious dangerous game hunting seeking validation from others. It's done to fulfill an inner desire that some men simply do not have (which, again, is perfectly ok). But to shite on someone for engaging in one of the most ancient and noblest of hobbies is pure, unadulterated ignorance and definitely gets a big old LOL from this guy. Were Teddy Roosevelt and Ernest Hemingway pussies in yall's mind? Do yourself a favor and pick up a copy of Death in the Long Grass by Peter Capstick. Read the stories of a man who spent many, many years in the bush hunting the most dangerous animals on the planet and then try to convince yourself that going into the tall grass after a wounded leopard isn't a dangerous affair. Even with a gun the outcome is far from certain.

quote:

---

How many of those offspring typically survive to maturity though. That's an important number that you left out.

---

First that is a number that is difficult to find and varies species to species.
Second my opponent was making a super over simplified argument.
Third, all I had to do was show that his point was useless. Mission accomplished!
Therefore your question was not germane to my argument.

However if every female raises 2 calves to maturity than the population is stable. Once again simple math: if 10% survive that equals 2.7 replacements. That is an expanding population! Modern whaling is not killing anything near 90%!

Now my math was simplified to show that imbecilic spewing of factoids like 3 year calving intervals and ten year maturation periods are meaningless by themselves. This is enough to show the false nature of my opponents.

Read back however, and you will see my assertion and proof from reputable (often hostile sources to whaling) that the targeted species are expanding or are at safe and stable numbers.

I am not for demonizing hunting, just as I'm not for demonizing fishing because of the whaling topic that started this thread.

You can support hunting, believe it is vital to conservation, and still call out the problems inherent to wildlife management in many parts of Africa.

To act as if hunting is the only thing keeping giraffes, lions, and elephants around is laughable. Eco tourism is a thing which is only increasing in popularity. I stand by the statement that African trophy hunting of threatened species is morally bankrupt.

quote:

---

To act as if hunting is the only thing keeping giraffes, lions, and elephants around is laughable. Eco tourism is a thing which is only increasing in popularity. I stand by the statement that African trophy hunting of threatened species is morally bankrupt.

---

I agree