Well it looks that way....


"The Obama administration and the International Whaling Commission want to allow legal hunting again. It's misguided policy.
April 28, 2010|Joel Reynolds

No one was surprised when conservation organizations such as the Natural Resources Defense Council challenged the anti-environmental policies of President George W. Bush. But it's a shock to many when we part company with the Obama administration.

It happens. And it's happening right now on the question of what to do about commercial whaling and, more specifically, whether to maintain the 25-year-old moratorium against the killing of whales for profit. Last week, the International Whaling Commission announced a proposed 10-year deal, spearheaded by the Obama administration, that would suspend the moratorium and allow whaling countries to kill whales legally for commercial purposes for the first time in a generation.
Ads by Google
Advertisement

There's no disagreement between the council and the administration about the fact that the moratorium is one of the singular environmental achievements of the 20th century. Before it was adopted, on average an estimated 38,000 whales were being killed each year. Since the moratorium, that number has dropped to about 1,240, and whale populations have begun, little by little, to rebound.

There's no disagreement that whales are among the most extraordinary creatures ever to inhabit the Earth. And there's no disagreement that we need to protect them, or that many of the large whale species covered by the proposed agreement -- humpback, fin, sperm, sei and Bryde's whales -- are depleted or near extinction.

The problem is how best to protect them.

The Obama administration argues that the whaling moratorium should be suspended because it has loopholes that are being illegally exploited by Japanese, Norwegian and Icelandic whalers. They believe that after 25 years of conflict within the International Whaling Commission, commercial whaling should be legalized in the hope that, by bringing the killing out into the open through agreed-upon quotas, a consensus eventually will emerge in support of a phase-out of whaling altogether.

Its intentions are good. But the strategy is dead wrong.

First, the proposed deal nowhere requires a phase-out of whaling. Not in 10 years. Not ever."

With all of the other problems facing our country why bother with this right now? is it just to create a 'smoke screen' so he can slip pass other legislation that will become over shadowed by this?

If you disagree with legalizing whaling then contact this number, 202-482-3436 this is the government office and you can leave a message. Or contact your local division of Greanpeace

Votes. Have. Consequences. This is just another one of them ...

Yes they do, hopefully in a good way THIS time around.

If we are unable to openly control the oceans today, with the over fishing in the bahamas and other parts of the ocean, also even with the catch allowances asian, americian ,even canadian markets still brake the laws without fear. So What point in legalizing make it "CRIMINAL" IN THE WORLD COURTS and do it not talk about it take there boats sieze there property ( purchased with ilegal profits)

Zero tolerance on the oceans we all eat from it.

Who knows a stronger force present on the water may even slow down the pirate attacks and delaped oil barges from floating across our oceans

Let me grab mah fishin' pole!!!

delaped? ...oh never mind.

Considering my understanding is that it has never stopped maybe this can change things.

Internationally it hasn't stopped...but the ban Obama is planning on lifting is the U.S. ban on commercial whaling. We always try to control other countries...but what country wants us to control them when we can't even manage our own?

..by the time all that oil mixes in,they won't have to worry about the whales..or pretty much anything else...

Got that right, my friend!

Next dumb question, in the aftermath of the oil spill, who exactly is going to pay in the end???

tax payers....that's normally who pays