Introduction
Norwegian and Japanese authorities argue that whaling constitutes an important part of their cultures and, therefore, would like exemptions to continue whaling. The bone of contention with the international community concerns whether the whaling is for commercial purposes or the whaling is just for use as a food source for local and indigenous people.
Cultural Traditions
Traditionally, many indigenous people have hunted and eaten all sorts of different animals. If whaling is a necessity to provide meat for some of the Norwegian and Japanese people then whaling – especially of non-endangered – species should be permitted. This should be allowed insofar as the killing of whales is essential for the continued survival or basic-well being of the group of people that hunt the whales. International organizations such as the WTO (Anonymous, 2015)
…show more content…
This type of hunting is not strictly a threat to animal species such as whales. However, the claim by Norway and Japan that cultural dependence on hunting whales is central to the economic livelihood of local people such as that of the Inuit is without much substance (Matera,2000). First off, both Norway and Japan are wealthy countries that can easily replace whaling with other sustainable economic activities for groups of people that would be affected with a ban on whaling. However, whaling for cultural reasons on a small and local scale can be allowed. This provides a food source of groups of people that have relied on whale meat for generations. It would be unfair to deny then the right to eat whale meat and instead ask them to eat other meats such as beef or lamb that they are not familiar with. Therefore, whaling on a small village scale should be allowed to continue. This obviously excludes whaling on a commercial scale even where the whaling countries claim it is for scientific purposes, as in most cases that is just a cover