さあ！諸君！捕鯨問題だ！

The Republic of Korea could only accept a resumption of
whaling, except for aboriginal subsistence, after
establishment of the RMS, and was concerned that if Japan
resumed whaling, its own fishermen would want to catch
whales which should be conserved for whalewatching. The
Netherlands opposed the proposal because it introduced a
third category of whaling before the RMS is completed and
it had concems over some details of the Action Plan.
On being put to the vote the proposed amendment to the
Schedule was defeated, with 8 votes in favour, 16 against
and 5 abstentions. The Resolution was therefore not
considered further.
Subsequently, Japan introduced another Resolution to
resolve the distress of the Japanese small-type coastal
whaling as community-based whaling. This sought to:
address outstanding issues of the commercial aspects of the
Action Plan adopted last year; to convene a Workshop to
review and identify commercial aspects and socio-economic
and cultural needs of the community-based whaling, and to
report these to a Working Group held prior to the next
Annual Meeting; and to seek to take a decision on an interim
relief allocation at the 49th Meeting.
Australia indicated that its policy is to seek an end to all
whaling, not to create a new category, nor make such a
commitment for next year which made the third part of the
Resolution redundant. St Lucia considered that a country
wishing to end all whaling was not acting according to the
Convention and thought the Resolution moved the issue
forward from the 1995 Resolution. The USA pointed out that
its concerns included how illegally taken whale meat might
be handled, as well as catches of other species and incidental
takes, in addition to the commerciality question. The Russian
Federation asked about the financial implications of the
proposed meetings and the Secretary identified an
unallocated sum within the approved budget which could be
used for this purpose.