Richard Leakey

Category: Whale hunting | Date: Nov 29 2007 | By: admin

I can’t contain my anger and disgust at Japans intention, once again, to contravene the International Whaling Commissions (IWC) conventions in order to embark on a massive whale hunt. This issue has attracted an enormous amount of attention because this year they are going further than ever before. You can read other views from Chile here and Australia here. In addition to hundreds of Minke and fin whales, they intend to kill 50 hump backed whales. They call it “research” and this year 1,000 whales will be slaughtered to gather “data”. We know this is unnecessary. Whales can and are being studied elsewhere using non-lethal methods.

I cannot accept Japans reasoning to hunt whales.

“Humpback whales in our research area are rapidly recovering,” said the Fisheries Agency’s whaling chief, Hideki Moronuki. “Taking 50 humpbacks from a population of tens of thousands will have no significant impact whatsoever.” Like humans, apes, elephants and other sentient animals, whales live in complex societies. Killing individuals will affect them just as it would if your brother, mother or child was being hunted.

Some Japanese authorities maintain that eating whale meat is a gourmet delicacy and defend the hunt as an important part of Japanese cultural heritage. They claim that the hunt is necessary to keep this culture alive.

I have nothing against sustaining cultures, but this claim is a blatantly misleading. Whale meat only became popular in Japan during the WW II because it helped ward off starvation and malnutrition. It was the cheapest source of protein in Japan at that time, but it has never been very popular. In 2006 commercial freezers that store whale meat in Japan had 2,700 tons of uneaten stock, and whale burgers and whale spaghetti bolognaise were being introduced and served in school lunch cafeterias and distributed to old people’s homes! If it is such an integral part of national culture, why are they forcing people to eat it?

Japan can hardly claim that they need these whales for research or food. I see this annual kill as simply a pretext for keeping the Japanese whaling industry alive. It is a disgrace that such a rich and civilized country would engage in such a barbaric and cruel activity. Cultures change as civilizations move on and that is how new social norms develop. It’s time Japan moved on.

As I write another tragedy is erupting as emotional pressure has pitted conservationists against each other. The Sea Shepherd is apparently trying to ram the Japanese ships but are locked in an argument with Green peace about militant versus peaceful means to stop the whale hunt. You can read about it here.

Do you have a view about this hunt and about who is right: Greenpeace or Sea Shepherd?

This video clip and the photos above were generously provided by IFAW I hope they help you to understand the issues and feel compelled to take action.

22 responses so far

Category: climate change | Date: Nov 22 2007 | By: admin

Today I am posting a video cast with my thoughts on conservation in parks in relation to changing climate. This is a subject that I feel strongly about and hope that we can start a discussion about how we can protect the needs of wild animals and plants in the future.

10 responses so far

Category: Enforcement, Politics | Date: Nov 06 2007 | By: admin

One of the most famous wildlife spectacles, the flamingoes of Lake Nakuru National Park are at risk of pandemics like bird flu

When we started WildlifeDirect, the idea was to address the chronic shortfall of funds for sustaining Africa’s protected areas, we believe that these parks and protected areas are key to the conservation and protection of the continents biological diversity. Recent trends have seen a significant shift in funding for these protected areas, from government funds to a dependency on tourism incomes. This tourism revenue is both a short term boon and a long term risk. Tourism is notoriously fickle and prone to external threats. For example, terrorism or disease pandemics.

Lions and other big cats are amongst the most vulnerable species

I believe that we have become complacent during these times of booming tourism, revenues appear safe, and are a growing means of financing essential conservation work in our protected areas. The sustainability of this income however, is a matter that has not been addressed. It could be interrupted at any moment, for example due to natural disasters, conflict, or acts of terrorism.

Imagine if you had planned a safari to Rwanda to see the rare mountain gorillas. After planning your holiday, a terrorist strike at the countries capital Kigali would result in an international travel warning that would discourage if not prevent you from traveling. Tourism revenues to the Rwandan authorities (ORTPN) would crash and they would have to cut back on protection of the area to avoid going broke. By the time the travel warning is lifted, the gorillas could all be gone, …dead - due to failure of enforcement to prevent illegal hunting, habitat destruction or the progress of the disease. They will never be back, lost forever.

It could happen to any country at any time.

With tourism revenues, we could afford to ensure that our Park Wardens were disciplined and competent.

In 1998 Kenya was attacked by Al Qaeda. We knew that the attack was not targeting our parks, however it affected us drastically. The result of travel restrictions and bad publicity led to a near collapse in our tourism industry due to negative travel advisories and even flight cancellations. Park revenues declined significantly, it was a disaster since protected area management costs were financed almost entirely from gate collections.

I remember that difficult time well because I was the Director of the Kenya Wildlife Service at that time. We were eventually able to convince the Kenya Government to come our rescue with a financial package that allowed us to limp along until the tourism industry recovered. Were it not for this support, we could have been overrun by armed poachers, and we would have lost our rhinos, our elephants and other species, because we couldn’t sustain basic operations and enforcement.

We were lucky that the Kenya government rescued us - the truth is it was for purely economic reasons, tourism contributes 12% of the country’s GDP. Most African governments however, will not have a rescue package for biodiversity disasters as there are so many other priorities like poverty, health and education. I am therefore convinced that we need to find another way to buy time for these countries, parks and protected areas during these critical times of need.

I can’t emphasize enough how precarious the funding situation can be for conservation. This is why WildlifeDirect really must establish a strong potential to raise significant funds for times of crises to enable countries to buy time for Conservation. We need to buy time for species and ecosystems for times when tourism or other incomes are not able to support the costs of management. If this can be achieved, one could visit a park at any time online, take a virtual tour even if a real visit was prevented due to disease or acts of terrorism. At least the wild animals and places would still be there for a real visit at a later date. All it would take is a few dollars from any many people to make it possible for us to buy time during these crises.

Conservation in the Aberdares National Park would not be possible without the support of local communities - this fence barrier keeps the peace. If tourism revenues declined this fence would not be maintained and the buffaloes and other large mammals would be at risk and a cause for conflict with the people.

White Rhinos went extinct in Kenya due to poaching - today you can see the southern race close up in Kenya following their reintroduction. Their calmness of these animlas reflects their sense of security.

I believe that there are tens of millions of people out there who care about wildlife and would be willing to make a 2 dollar donation to secure the future of wildlife. We are not asking for the crisis money now, we are proposing a ‘virtual endowment’, a promise if you like, that we can reach out to you at a later date when there is a critical need.

For this ‘virtual endowment’ to be effective in raising the hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars for rescuing biodiversity, then we need to grow WildlifeDirect’s ability to reach out to these millions, to keep them in touch with what is happening on the ground, and to respond with a small donation at a time of need. This network of people will be our virtual human endowment.

I would be very interested in hearing ideas on how we can develop this concept and to improve WildlifeDirect’s potential to provide biodiversity disaster relief. Do not hesitate to contact us with your thoughts and ideas on how we can tap into this massive global caring community that can help.

Technorati : Richard Leakey

14 responses so far