The act of hunting whales has been around since the beginning of human history. However, overexploitation throughout the last centuries has severely depleted these species. Yet still, thousands of whales are killed each year for profit. Mankind’s avaricious nature for more money has driven these creatures to their demise. Despite that, an increasing number of people worldwide are against commercial whaling.
The whales were captured off the coast of Russia.” I am starting to wonder, why do they want to bring more whales and capture more? They already have a bunch! Other people might say that they are fixing the tanks to make it more natural. But I argue, can they really make it as natural as the habitat? The ocean has many different kinds of food for the animals, they can live in their family or swim with their groups, (pods.)
Whaling, which has been in practice for centuries, involved hunting and killing whales in order to obtain oil, meat, or bone. In past years, it has proven controversial and has brought up the question as to whether or not whaling should continue. In order to get a full glimpse of this issue, we need to gather the pros and cons to whaling. By doing this, we can truly assess whether or not whaling is something that should be carried on and legalised. In the Faroe Islands, there is an old saying which states: “Eat whale meat and blubber, then you will grow tall and strong”.
In the materialistic world today, whaling seems to become a norm to the society as it happens around us in the world everyday. In Japan, it was defined as “Japanese Whaling” and it begun in the 12th century. Whaling is an activity that people hunt whales from the sky blue ocean to make profits from it, use them for research purposes and extract the nutrient from their body for human consumption that is essential for human’s health. In fact, it is just an activity that kills whale for human’s own good. There are people believed that whaling has been done for years.
I think Killer Whales should not be in captivity because, of the injures they can get in their tanks, how they get stressed out and they are better in the wild. The first reason why I think should not be in captivity is of what happens in their tank. The first piece of evidence from the PETA practical “Aquariums and Marine Parks” is that since the tanks for the orcas are usually small for them, they get insane because of the echolocation they use. This makes me think that since their fin sometimes curves, that they would get injured while swimming. In addition, this might make the whale die faster than what they are supposed to live to.
History of commercial fishing in Hawaii Shortly after Statehood, a U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries proposal labeled the Hawaii fishery as "dying". Hawaii's major commercial fisheries had been dominated by traditional practices that reflected Hawaii's Japanese immigrant heritage and its impact on the local fishery and seafood markets. The predominant commercial fishery was aku (skipjack tuna), which was caught by a live-bait, pole-and-line, wooden sampan fleet, known as aku boats, and which was landed primarily for canning. In 1960, over 60% of Hawaii's total recorded commercial fishery landings (by weight) was aku, and the percentage remained over 50% until 1970. By the mid-1970's the number of aku boats and
Their bodies have learned to adapt to its surroundings in order to survive. Despite their appetite and aggressive reputation bull sharks can be docile in certain environments. In the aqua clear waters of the Bahamas, divers regularly interact with crowds of bull sharks (National Geographic News). In Genesis 1:21 it says, "And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good." God created everything with a specific purpose.
It’s very easy to judge an action when you are not at the other person’s shoes, that’s why there is a balance to be achieved when issues like that come to light. First of all discussion in a peaceful manner should be held and both sides should state the pros and the cons of their argument. I’m sure that for every conflict there is a golden section that will bring tranquility. Governments and other organizations should be beside those people that are losing income after bans like the whaling, are issued. Programs should be conducted in order to give to the whale hunters; in this case, incentives to start something new and be able to provide for their family in a different blood free
Unless not performing the activity would have such a negative economic impact that it would result in the eventual loss of the culture it should have minimal influence on the request for an exemption. While Norway has requested a cultural exemption their primary concern does seems to be the potential economic loss to the community than any other (Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Fisheries, n.d.). If there is an argument that without an activity like whaling the current culture would be lost that is a valid argument to make. Though if this argument is made while ignoring other potential ways to leverage opportunities for a robust economy in the culture it may be a false argument, being used to just prop up a position that otherwise would crumble without such support. However, on this issue the arguments opposing whaling seem to be supported by similar false narratives.
Are Globalization and diversity antinomical? Since the beginning of globalization, wherever we travel in the world we have a great chance to find the products that we like to use or eat back home. This is surely a good way not to feel disoriented when going to visit another country but it does raise the question of the loss of cultural diversity. Due to its marketing power, American products are taking over the local tastes and the demands, pushing the establishment of a global culture reliant on technology and focused on consumerism while also creating an everyday dependency to English as international language. Therefore, the thought of globalization threatening the cultural diversity is legitimate.