Bea West Israel

1/2/12
Chemistry #1 - Whaling

Giants of the Sea

Find a controversial world science topic and explain both sides.

It was an adventurous prospect, whaling--taking boats out on the high seas to hunt and kill the
giants of the ocean, enjoying prestige upon return and always improving harpoons, manpower,
and ships. In the 17th and 18th centuries, whaling was undertaken for oil to light lamps, make
soap, wool, and leather, as well as cooking oil. Bones and baleens were of the right shape and
durability for corsets, bustles, perfumes, and lubricants. In the centuries following, many of these
were replaced, but the meat and oil retained its value and the practice continued. It grew to be a
huge industry, saving the cultures of many small fishing communities from globalization and
becoming a controlled, all-but-humane hunting practice; however, it also threatened the members
of nearly every whale species on earth, including the blue whale, and is arguably a slaughter of
animals with at least the sentience of humans.
Whaling, for all its cons, has become a more humane killing method than in history, is a
unique part of many cultural heritages and histories, and has not yet permanently damaged
ecosystems of the world. (Queensland Government, no date given) It is a large industry,
providing jobs and supporting small fishing villages and island communities in the world
economy--because in up to four communities in Japan and six in Northern Norway, whaling is an
economic staple. It does these communities a favor by keeping harmful, industrial factories from
being built up there, and keeps their people from overcrowding big cities. (Barthelmess, 1994)
Furthermore, whales are not being killed inhumanely, instead "unaware" of their death
after a life in the wild. Many, including ethical philosophers and scientists, argue that this is more
acceptable than the inhumane treatment of meat cattle. (Norway has been developing a "penthrite
harpoon grenade," since 1983, which kills or renders the whale unconscious almost
instantaneously) And no species, of the seventy-five variants, has become extinct because of
whaling. One stock of a certain species may become extinct, but in another region of the world
that species will still exist. (The resilience is proven in the California gray whale stock, which
has been hunted since 1962 with an annual quota of 200 animals. Yet in the same period, its
numbers doubled to over 20,000.) (Barthelmess, 1994)
A favorite point, made by the whaling giant companies in Norway, is that whaling can be
controlled. The country has implemented an "inspection scheme," a black box used to access
data on the number of whales hauled aboard a ship, their weight, ship GPS position, engine
effort, steering commands, and harpoon cannon shots. (Barthelmess, 1994)
Despite the adventure, the prestige and the care eventually taken to keep from driving
multiple species of cetacean to extinction, whaling had more consequences than anyone,
especially the countries who made their living off of it, cared to admit. In the 17th and 18th
century, the meat was rarely exported for food--using only baleen, bones, and oil. However,
demand increased around the world, and, while no species actually went extinct, many species
were so depleted that some whaling industries began to collapse. Hunters began to focus on
every whaling species in the world to compensate, driving even the blue whale's numbers from
220,000 to only five hundred nowadays. (Fears, 2009) With the technologies and ability to masshunt the whales developing, extinction became a possibility: simply because no full species went
extinct during the "peak of the whaling," it doesn't mean that they will never, especially with the
technology available now that exponentially increases hunting efficiency. By the 20th century,

Bea West Israel

1/2/12
Chemistry #1 - Whaling
blue whales, right whales, fin whales, and sperm whales were on the brink of extinction. To say
that "whale species never actually went extinct" is an invalid argument against the destruction of
ocean ecosystems it still caused.
The morals of hunting of so many of them is argued in itself, especially when considering
an oft-used claim against whaling: that whales are sentient, intelligent beings. They have a
unique language, especially the song of the humpback whale, not found anywhere else in the
world. They are, of course, unskilled in human indicators of intelligence such as technology, but
possess a much heavier brain (even in relation to their body size) and a fourth lobe, whereas
humans only have three. This has given rise to speculation that whales are not only as intelligent
as humans, but have an even more complex brain. (Sea Shepherd, 2012)
It is known in the world that this industry is both a prosperous safe haven for small
fishing communities and a trade blighted with corruption. It can be seen as a carefully-controlled,
prestigious, abundant adventure or a warping, greedy waste of animal intelligence. Some call it
humane hunting and state-of-the-art harpoon guns; others call it murder of a self-aware creature.
Any country is given to a different opinion: necessity over preservation of nature, and wealth
over natural sustainability. The arguments are made over and over again, and--just as every
country is entitled to its own opinion--so is every person.

Bea West Israel

1/2/12
Chemistry #1 - Whaling

Bibliography
"Argument: What's Wrong with Whaling?" Dept. of Education and Training. Queensland
Government, n.d. Web. 3 Jan. 2013.
<http://www.learningplace.com.au/sc/online/eng_4/EY4_arg_ACT_whatswrong.pdf#page1>.
Barthelmess, Klaus. "WHALING - CON & PRO." WHALING - CON & PRO. N.p.,
1994. Web. 03 Jan. 2013. <http://luna.pos.to/whale/gen_con_pro_whaling.html>.
Fears, Niki. "How New Whaling Weapons Such as the Harpoon Gun of 20th C. Norway
Led to Near Whale Extinction." Bright Hub. Bright Hub, Inc, 21 May 2009. Web. 03 Jan. 2013.
"The Intelligent Whale - Sea Shepherd." Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. Sea
Shepherd Conservation Society, 2012. Web. 03 Jan. 2013