When we last checked in with the International Whaling Commission, during its 55th annual meeting in Berlin, commissioners agreed to launch a landmark Conservation Committee, an action that promptly caused Japan to threaten to withdraw from the IWC and create its own international pro-whaling organization.

What a difference a year makes.

As commissioners prepare to convene for the 56th annual meeting in Sorrento, Italy, events have taken a dramatic turn: Japan is apparently no longer threatening to sever ties with the IWC, but the country has been stocking the commission with more pro-whaling nations, which threatens to tip the balance away from conservation. What's more, the Conservation Committee itself could come under attack some time during the four-day run of the IWC meetings, from July 19-22.

But no matter what pops up on the agenda this year, the whaling and legal experts with The HSUS and Humane Society International will be on hand in Sorrento to lobby IWC delegates for stronger conservation measures—and to resist Japan's desire to send the IWC back into the dark ages, before the commercial whaling moratorium. The HSUS has identified several important issues that we will be pushing this year in Sorrento: creating more whale sanctuaries, maintaining the commercial whaling moratorium, ditching the current draft of the weak Revised Management Scheme, and adopting strict humane standards for killing whales (when such killings are allowed).

The Conservation Committee

Japan and other pro-whaling nations have argued that the IWC was not originally designed for whale conservation, that its mission has always been to merely manage stocks so there will be plenty of whales to kill in the future. Because of their vested interested in the continued slaughter of whales, Japan and the like have strongly resisted the creation of the Conservation Committee. That resistance could continue during these IWC meetings.

However, what Japan conveniently ignores is the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW), the convention that created the IWC. It clearly states a two-fold purpose: One, to regulate whaling and, two, to ensure that whale stocks are properly conserved for future generations. Japan and the others pretend that this conservation purpose does not exist.

What's more, The HSUS believes that Japan and others are operating out of a very limited self-interest, not in the best interest of the whales, some populations of which are at critical levels. We argue that the Conservation Committee is a codification of the IWC's conservation work to date—and a reflection of the expectations that society places on the IWC.

"Agreements and international organizations are not static," says Kitty Block, special counsel for The HSUS's United Nations and Treaties section. "They progress and evolve based on precautionary science and social mores. There are a multitude of threats that cetaceans and whales face: fished-out oceans, polluted waters, and climate change. Society expects the IWC to protect and conserve these animals."

Should conservationists ultimately rule the roost at the IWC, as they should, Japan would be hard-pressed to create another international organization with any recognized authority over whale stocks. The negotiating history of Article 65 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea supports IWC jurisdiction over whales.

Patricia Forkan, The HSUS's senior vice president for International Programs and Regions as well as president of Humane Society International, was part of the negotiations on Article 65, and she has compiled a compelling history of those events. The bottom line: The negotiating history of Article 65 clearly indicates that the international organization with which states shall cooperate is the IWC, or its more conservation-focused successor.

"A few whaling nations cannot now alter or rewrite the history of Article 65 simply because they do not wish to honor the conservation measures of committees adopted at IWC," Forkan notes.

Humane Killing

The mission of the Conservation Committee includes drafting and implementing an official conservation agenda for the commission. The HSUS believes that such an agenda should include provisions on the humane killing of whales.

The HSUS is part of a coalition of more than 140 non-governmental organizations, which together have launched a campaign initiative called "Whalewatch." The coalition firmly believes that all present methods of killing whales are inhumane because, among other problems, they do not routinely or reliably render the animals instantaneously insensible. Immediate insensibility is a requirement in any definition of "humane" in humane slaughter laws.

The IWC has been concerned with whale killing methods since 1957 when the commission defined "humane killing" as the process by which the animal is rendered instantaneously insensible until death. In spite of this, very little progress has been made on this issue. Current killing methods still no not meet this standard as death—and perhaps more relevantly, insensibility— is often not instantaneous.

"What's more," says The HSUS's marine mammal scientist Naomi Rose, who is attending the IWC meetings, "the pursuit of the whale itself can cause stress and possibly even death, even in animals who are never actually struck. Animals are also struck but manage to escape, which is a serious welfare issue as well."

"We feel it is crucial that the IWC enacts and implements strict humane standards for whale killing," Rose adds. "It is politically, legally, and ethically inconsistent to require humane slaughter methods for certain animals and not for others."

Sanctuaries

Last year, Japan and its allies managed to defeat two proposals for whale sanctuaries, one for the South Pacific and another for the South Atlantic. Even though both proposals garnered more than 50% of the vote, neither could muster the three-quarters majority need for passage.

Despite the setback, and despite Japan's stocking of the IWC with more allies such as Mauritania and Tuvalu, The HSUS believes commissioners need to work cooperatively and create more sanctuaries. These marine protected areas, after all, are increasingly recognized as among the most effective methods to allow depleted fisheries resources to recover. "Clearly, it is appropriate to apply this management tenet to whales and whaling," The HSUS's Block says.

Sanctuaries, Block notes, are not new to the IWC. Such protected areas have been part of the convention since its inception. Nations can also, and regularly do, create regional sanctuaries. "All member countries need to support the creation of new sanctuaries within the IWC," Block says, "especially where range states are supportive of such efforts."

Revised Management Scheme

The Revised Management Scheme (RMS) is a plan for overseeing commercial whaling in the event Japan and its allies are able to lift the moratorium on commercial whaling. Unfortunately, the current draft of the RMS is wholly inadequate. Its weak provisions will be unable to regulate or control commercial whaling.

The draft RMS does not provide any means of effective enforcement. Penalties are not on the table for discussion. The ineffectiveness of the Infractions Committee and past IWC resolutions regarding scientific whaling make it clear that guidelines alone have no deterrent effect.

Just as bad, the RMS also does not provide for an international tracking and verification system to trace whales from capture to market. This is essential to ensure that whalers are following the quotas established under the Revised Management Procedure. Until the RMS contains these most basic provisions, it is not even on a par with most modern fisheries agreements.

Additionally, for the past three years, RMS discussions have been held behind closed doors with only a select group of delegates present. In the interest of good faith negotiations and transparency, these discussions must be re-opened to all countries and observers. RMS discussions are critical to future status of whale populations, the enforcement and compliance of whaling regulations, and precedents for international agreements. The HSUS calls on the IWC to ensure that these discussions are transparent and that the RMS includes strong provisions for enforcement and compliance.