International Whaling Statistics in Sandefjord, Norway. Upon voluntary reporting of
whale catchers, the Bureau was able to collect data on the numbers, sizes, species,
and areas of whales that were taken. In how far the reporting was accurate and
complete cannot be ascertained.
The drawn-up text was not accepted as such, but circulated amongst the League’s
member and non-member states for commenting. Based on these comments, another
Committee of Experts revised the first draft and presented its final report to the
Assembly of the League of Nations. In this report it was made clear that the
protection of whale stocks indeed served the interests of the whaling industry.
With this overarching narrative guiding the debates surrounding the draft, the
Convention for the Regulation of Whaling
1 was opened for signature on
24 September 1931 in Geneva. It was originally signed by 26 states, but was
eventually ratified by 28. Even though today Japan is a major whaling nation, at
that time its industrial scale whaling activities were in their infancy, which prompted
Japan not to join the convention in order to further develop its whaling industry.
Since Norway and the UK were elementary players in the global whaling
industry, the convention entered into force only upon ratification of eight states,
which must have included Norway and the UK. Once the convention had been
opened for signature, the UK, however, showed a degree of inertia in ratifying it
since it feared that its, at that time, strict provisions may have the opposite effect of
what it has set out to do: it may encourage whalers to change to so-called ‘flags of
convenience’—meaning they would sail under flags of nations that are not party to
the convention—in order not to be bound by the convention’s provisions. Whether
or not this was a legitimate concern or whether other factors may have played a role
in the UK’s inertia is impossible to determine. Be that as it may, also the UK ratified
the Convention on 18 October 1934 and it thus entered into force on
16 January 1935.
The Convention for the Regulation of Whaling was a convention that was drafted
with the interests of the whaling industry at its core and thus with the protection of
whales merely for this purpose. In other words, the convention did not strive to
protect whales (or even ecosystems), but considered whales a resource that can be
exploited for the benefit of humankind. This deeply anthropocentric approach was
not unique for this convention, however, but can be found in many other bi- or
multilateral regimes all over the world. Yet, particularly in the context of marine
mammals, anthropocentric views shaped the regimes of that time, as we will also see
in the case of the Bering Sea Fur Seal Regime (Chap. 6). Against this backdrop, the
provisions of the convention must be read. Article 4, for example, puts the right
whale and its subspecies under total protection. While seemingly beneficial for the
species, we must remember that the term ‘right’ whale stems from the fact that it
floats after being killed. It is thus the ‘right’ whale to go after, having led to
exploitation that has driven this species close to extinction. The protection of the
right whale is thus to be understood only for the possibility to exploit it further in the
1 Convention for the Regulation of Whaling of 24 September 1931 (155 LNTS 349).
5.2 The History of International Whaling Regulations
83
whale catchers, the Bureau was able to collect data on the numbers, sizes, species,
and areas of whales that were taken. In how far the reporting was accurate and
complete cannot be ascertained.
The drawn-up text was not accepted as such, but circulated amongst the League’s
member and non-member states for commenting. Based on these comments, another
Committee of Experts revised the first draft and presented its final report to the
Assembly of the League of Nations. In this report it was made clear that the
protection of whale stocks indeed served the interests of the whaling industry.
With this overarching narrative guiding the debates surrounding the draft, the
Convention for the Regulation of Whaling
1 was opened for signature on
24 September 1931 in Geneva. It was originally signed by 26 states, but was
eventually ratified by 28. Even though today Japan is a major whaling nation, at
that time its industrial scale whaling activities were in their infancy, which prompted
Japan not to join the convention in order to further develop its whaling industry.
Since Norway and the UK were elementary players in the global whaling
industry, the convention entered into force only upon ratification of eight states,
which must have included Norway and the UK. Once the convention had been
opened for signature, the UK, however, showed a degree of inertia in ratifying it
since it feared that its, at that time, strict provisions may have the opposite effect of
what it has set out to do: it may encourage whalers to change to so-called ‘flags of
convenience’—meaning they would sail under flags of nations that are not party to
the convention—in order not to be bound by the convention’s provisions. Whether
or not this was a legitimate concern or whether other factors may have played a role
in the UK’s inertia is impossible to determine. Be that as it may, also the UK ratified
the Convention on 18 October 1934 and it thus entered into force on
16 January 1935.
The Convention for the Regulation of Whaling was a convention that was drafted
with the interests of the whaling industry at its core and thus with the protection of
whales merely for this purpose. In other words, the convention did not strive to
protect whales (or even ecosystems), but considered whales a resource that can be
exploited for the benefit of humankind. This deeply anthropocentric approach was
not unique for this convention, however, but can be found in many other bi- or
multilateral regimes all over the world. Yet, particularly in the context of marine
mammals, anthropocentric views shaped the regimes of that time, as we will also see
in the case of the Bering Sea Fur Seal Regime (Chap. 6). Against this backdrop, the
provisions of the convention must be read. Article 4, for example, puts the right
whale and its subspecies under total protection. While seemingly beneficial for the
species, we must remember that the term ‘right’ whale stems from the fact that it
floats after being killed. It is thus the ‘right’ whale to go after, having led to
exploitation that has driven this species close to extinction. The protection of the
right whale is thus to be understood only for the possibility to exploit it further in the
1 Convention for the Regulation of Whaling of 24 September 1931 (155 LNTS 349).
5.2 The History of International Whaling Regulations
83