small nations change their position on whaling ban? if you read the article, it points out that the new resolution claims that the original ban was a temporary measure, and that it should be reviewed. sure, whatever. there seems to be some strong disagreement, Japan is accused of buying votes, and the Irish delegate just "held his head in his hands."
apparently, the japanese and other wealthy whaling nations (norway, among others), have convinced St. Kitts representative (and others) that it's the WHALES that are eating all the fish, and they only way to get them to come back is to kill the whales. it's not the dragnet fishing, then? good to know. here's a quote:
The backers have been pushing to lift the ban, saying it was a way to protect fish stocks from whales and give their small islands food security.
"We're dealing with an ecosystem where whales are on top of the food chain," said Daven Joseph, an IWC delegate from St. Kitts and Nevis.
it reminds me of when I was in a taxi cab on St. Croix, driving to an office when I was working out there for a short period. I didn't know they had a huge oil refinery there, and when I mentioned that to the taxi driver, he said, "mon, you know why dey got da refinery 'ere? because gaas is so cheap 'ere, mon!"can somebody explain to the small islands that the best way to ensure food security is to NOT CATCH AND EAT EVERY LAST FISH. did you get that? the whales will take care of themselves, top of the food chain or otherwise. I think I learned that in 9th grade science class. I think.
as if this were about the food chain. anti-whaling nations know it's about money: the pro-whaling nations are spending a lot of it, and the antis are not. come up with some cash and St. Kitts delegates might be able to understand that food chain / web-of-life thing. maybe.
1 comment:
The more than $100 million in aid that Japan has bribed those countries with over the years probably had nothing to do with it
Post a Comment