Vol. XVII No. 1 January 2008A publication of Cetacean ...csiwhalesalive.org/csi2008_01.pdf · Vol....

Vol. XVII No. 1 January 2008A publication of Cetacean Society International

Japan, the US and the IWCBy Kate O’Connell, CSI Board

On November 18th, 2007 the Japanese whalingfleet set sail from the port city of Shimonoseki. 239crew aboard four whaling vessels began the journeysouth towards the Southern Ocean Sanctuary, intenton killing the largest number of whales ever in bogus“scientific research” hunt. Japan’s harpoons were totake aim at 935 minkewhales and 50 fin whales,in addition to 50 hump-back whales. The huntsparked an internationaloutcry, as conservation-minded governments, en-vironmental groups andthe public voiced extremeanger at Japan’s decisionto escalate its whale hunt,and to set their sights onendangered whales.

Perhaps the most vo-cal and visible criticismcame from Australia,where the whaling issue had figured prominently inthe national elections that brought a new party topower just one week after Japan’s boats left port.Recently elected PM Paul Rudd made clear that hisgovernment would follow through with pre-electionpromises to act to protect whales from the Japaneseharpoons. Speaking at the Bali Climate Change meet-ing in mid-December, Rudd assured reporters that,“We take seriously Australia’s international obliga-tions on the proper protection of whales.” Other pro-

whale governments such as the UK and New Zealandspoke out publicly against Japan’s commercial whalehunt conducted under the guise of science.

Climate change could well have a profound im-pact on whale habitat and survivability, and it is dis-tressing to note that at the Bali meeting, the US origi-

nally blocked consensus,throwing internationalnegotiations into a tailspin. It was only after theUS was challenged by aneloquent and impas-sioned intervention fromthe delegation of PapuaNew Guinea (who de-manded that the US“lead, follow or get out ofthe way”) that the Ameri-cans agreed not to standin the way of progress onclimate talks.

At roughly the sametime as the US was trying to block progress on cli-mate issues, International Whaling Commission(IWC) Chair William Hogarth entered into a seriesof discussions with the Japanese government on whal-ing. On the 11th of December, Dr. Hogarth met withboth Foreign Ministry and Fisheries Agency officialsin Tokyo, and cited US concerns with JARPA II,Japan’s Antarctic research plan. According to reportsin the Japanese media, however, the Chair focusedhis concerns on the humpback whale take, not the

Japan still plans to kill 50 finbacks.Photo courtesy of Bill Rossiter.

Whales Alive! • January 2008 • Published by Cetacean Society International •

entire hunt, indicating that he felt that the humpback huntwould be an obstacle to progress in efforts to “normal-ize” the IWC (see Whales Alive! Vol. XVI No. 2 and 3).

On the 19th of December, Japanese Fisheries Agencyofficials flew to Washington, DC to meet with Hogarthto announce that they had decided to postpone the hump-back hunt. In a press conference held in Tokyo, Ministerof Foreign Affairs Komura explained the Japanese deci-sion as a way to buy time for Japan to make efforts to“repair” the IWC. Komura indicated at the press confer-ence that Dr. Hogarth had said that he, too, wanted to“fix the IWC which is not fulfilling its function”. In apress release, the US Secretary of Commerce praised thedecision as an “act of goodwill” towards the IWC.

While the decision by Japan to not target humpbacksat this time is good news for that species in the shortterm, governments and conservationists point out thatJapan’s lethal scientific whale hunt continues to go aheadfor minke and fin whales. On the 21st of December, thirtynations and the European Union sent a strongly wordedletter of condemnation to Japan, calling on it to immedi-

ately cease all of its lethal scientific research and callingfor the immediate return of the four vessel whaling fleetfrom Antarctic waters.

The US did not sign on to the demarche, which isdeeply troubling. It plays into Japan’s strategy and iso-lates the US from its former allies. Many environmental-ists who have been engaged in the whaling issue for anylength of time question whether Japan actually hadplanned to kill any humpback whales, but were ratherusing the hugely symbolic animal as leverage to get move-ment on their own efforts to ensure that some form ofcommercial whaling is again allowed by the whalingcommission.

In early March, the IWC will host a special meetingto discuss the future of the commission, and it is impera-tive that the US maintain a strong stand against the re-sumption of any form of commercial whaling. The USfailure to join on to the international demarche againstJapan is deeply troubling, and favors Japan’s tacticalgame. It also flies in the face of strong Congressionalopposition to whaling.

It is urgent that all CSI supporters contact the Secre-tary of Commerce and make their concerns known. Askthat the Secretary instruct the US delegation to the March,2008 special meeting of the IWC to not make any con-cessions to Japan’s whalers, and to hold firm on US sup-port for the commercial whaling ban.

The Honorable Carlos M. GutierrezSecretary of Commerce1401 Constitution Ave. NWWashington, DC 20230Email: [email protected]

JOINT DEMARCHE BY Australia, Argentina, Aus-tria, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, costa rica, Croatia, CzechRepublic, Ecuador, European Commission, Finland,France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxem-bourg, Mexico, Monaco, The Netherlands, New Zealand,Portugal, San Marino, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain,Sweden, United Kingdom and Uruguay.

Objection to Japan’s Scientific Whaling

We, the Governments of Australia, Argentina, Aus-tria, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, CzechRepublic, Ecuador, European Commission, Finland,France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxem-

Whales Alive!A publication of Cetacean Society International

Editor: Brent S. Hall

CSI is an all-volunteer, non-profit, tax-exempt conservation,education, and research organization with representatives inover 25 countries. Our goal is the “optimum utilization ofcetacean resources,” as called for in the 1946 Treaty of theInternational Whaling Commission, through the protectionof viable habitat and the cessation of all killing and captivedisplay of whales, dolphins, and porpoises. We support andpromote benign activities such as regulated whale watching,nonlethal and humane research, and widespread educational,environmental and observation programs relating to free-roaming cetaceans internationally. Our ultimate objective isthe global acceptance of peaceful coexistence and mutualenrichment for both humans and cetaceans.

Cetacean Society InternationalP.O. Box 953, Georgetown, CT 06829 U.S.A.

Phone: 203-770-8615 Fax: 860-561-0187E-Mail: [email protected]

Web: csiwhalesalive.orgCSI is a member of WhaleNet

President: William W. RossiterVice-President: Brent S. HallSecretary: Jessica L. DickensTreasurer: Barbara Kilpatrick

Director Emeritus: Robbins Barstow


bourg, Mexico, Monaco, The Netherlands, New Zealand,Portugal, San Marino, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain,Sweden, United Kingdom and Uruguay present our com-pliments to the Government of Japan and wish to takethis opportunity to inform the Government of Japan ofour strong objection to the resumption of the second Japa-nese Whale Research Program under Special Permit inthe Antarctic (JARPA II), which started on November18, 2007.

We recall previous International Whaling Commis-sion (IWC) Resolutions calling for the withdrawal of theJARPA II proposal, and most recently Resolution 2007/01, adopted during the Commission’s 59th Annual Meet-ing, which urges the Government of Japan to suspendindefinitely the lethal aspects of JARPA II conductedwithin the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

We deeply regret the decision of the Government ofJapan to disregard repeated requests from the interna-tional community to refrain from issuing special permitsfor research involving the killing of whales within theSouthern Ocean Sanctuary, which was established by theIWC in 1994.

We are profoundly concerned that the Governmentof Japan has endorsed the take of up to 935 minke, 50 finand 50 humpback whales under JARPA II this season –the largest lethal scientific take ever – despite the IUCN(World Conservation Union) classification of fin whalesas ‘endangered’ (at a very high risk of extinction) andhumpback whales as ‘vulnerable’ (at a high risk of ex-tinction). The IWC recognised the threatened status ofhumpbacks several decades ago, enacting a ban on whal-ing of the species in 1963. We have grave concerns that

to draw in people to share her concerns.When Peggy learned of Japan’s intent to kill hump-

backs, she was inspired to create “Homage to Megaptera”,50 original paintings of the flukes of real whales seen inAntarctica, and likely to be targeted by Japan. Hump-back tails are so unique that each painting is truly a por-trait of a real individual known to researchers and whalewatchers. As you read this we are helping Peggy to as-semble the life histories of each of these Pacific hump-backs, to emphasize them as individuals, but targeted bywhaling.

Here are two of these whales’ portraits painted by

Peggy Oki needs your help to help whales! You’llremember her 30,000 Origami Whale Curtain, displayedat the IWC meeting in Anchorage, and profiled in CSI’sJuly newsletter. Peggy had persisted against many oddsto present the curtain there, as the mindset of IWC peopleis not tuned to art. But many were then moved by theirimmersion in the colorful, flowing, evocative and absorb-ing display, which is still on tour. It should be at the ChileIWC meeting too!

To communicate her concerns for whales Peggyworks her art hard, just as she leverages her fame as asurfer, mountain climber, and professional skateboarder

JARPA II will undermine any future recovery and thelong term viability of these species.

We note with concern that the program will targetspecies that are essential to the whale watching indus-tries of several IWC Member States, and the subjects oflong-term non-lethal research programs which are yield-ing wide-ranging insights into the species’ biology andecology.

We deeply regret the large numbers of whales takenunder JARPA programs which, notably, outnumber thewhales killed globally by Japan for scientific research inthe 31 year period prior to the entry into force of the mora-torium on commercial whaling. We are extremely con-cerned that more than 11,000 whales have been killedunder scientific programs since the introduction of themoratorium. We call upon all members of the IWC tofully adhere to the word and spirit of the whaling mora-torium, which is intended to protect all whale speciesworldwide.

While we note Japan’s position that its JARPA pro-grams are consistent with the text of the InternationalConvention for the Regulation of Whaling, we once againdraw attention to the availability of non-lethal researchtechniques to obtain adequate data for biological, popu-lation and management purposes, rendering Japan’s le-thal research programme unnecessary.

Taking into consideration the Government of Japan’senvironmental credentials in several areas, we stronglyurge Japan to join the international community and ceaseall its lethal scientific research on whales, and assure theimmediate return of the vessels which are implementingJARPA II.

Peggy Oki’s “Homage to Megaptera”By William Rossiter


Peggy:

tribal members killed a gray whale in apparent violationof both US and Tribal law. The five members (FrankieGonzales, Wayne Johnson, Andy Noel, Theron Parker andWilliam Secor Sr.) have pleaded not guilty to the chargesthat have been brought against them by both the US gov-ernment and the Makah Tribal Court. The kill, which tookplace on September 8th, 2007 has been especially criti-cized by the tribe’s marine mammal biologist, JonathanScordino.

In a scathing report of the incident, Scordino accusedthe five Makah of not knowing how to shoot a whalehumanely; the animal suffered for more than 9 ½ hoursbefore it eventually slipped below the water and died.According to the biologist, the whale had been harpooned

One hundred and fifty years ago, a lighthouse wasbuilt on the remote island of Tatoosh, on land belongingto the Makah tribe. The light guards the entrance to theStrait of Juan de Fuca and helped navigators wend theirway through the rough, rocky waters off the reservationat Neah Bay. James Swann, an anthropologist who livedwith the Makah tribe for a period of three years in thelatter half of the 1800s, called the lighthouse “the brightstar of Tatoosh”. Tatoosh once served as a summer homefor some of the Makah, who would fish off its shores,and the island has special spiritual significance for theTribe.

Last autumn, a different kind of spotlight shined onthe waters of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, when five Makah

The Makah Whale Kill:Is there any light shining from such a dark moment?

By Kate O’Connell, CSI Board

You can see all these portraits, Peggy’s statement andpurpose with “Homage”, and much more, at: http://www.peggy-oki.com/50flukes.html.

But how and why should you help Peggy? Becausewe think her origami curtain and “Homage” can make adifference at the next IWC meeting. You can help Peggyto get there, sign a petition and get your photo on one ofthe most inspiring web sites we have seen: “Minds in theWater; The Visual Petition Contest” gives 5 passionatepeople around the world the opportunity to travel withRasta and other top surfers to the IWC (InternationalWhaling Commission) meeting in Chile in June 2008.On an all expenses paid trip the person who gathers thelargest quantity of portraits for the Visual Petition in theirpart of the world will help to physically hand the globalpetition to the delegates of the IWC.

Start by going to this web site: http://www.visualpetition.com/slippages/home.php. Click on“join petition now” for instructions, and enter memberuser: PeggyO. You vote for Peggy and “sign” the petitionfor yourself by uploading a photo of yourself holding awhale photo, which you can get and print from that website, CSI’s Photogallery, or anywhere. By New Years about2,000 people had posted their photos; Peggy is number998. What number will you be?


four times and shot at least 16 times, and Scordino ac-cused the five of not even knowing how to use the riflesthey had brought with them; one of the rifles was evenlost overboard in the confusion of the kill. The hunterseventually ran out of ammunition, and the whale lingeredfor hours before sinking beneath the surface. Scordinobelieves that the gray whale likely died of internal bleed-ing due to gunshot wounds.

On November 27th, the five were charged under USfederal law on three counts: conspiracy to hunt a whale,whaling in violation of the federal Whaling ConventionAct, and harassing and killing the whale. The five pleadednot guilty to all charges and the case will be heard in theUS District Court in Tacoma on March 18th, 2008. Ifconvicted on these charges, the hunters can be fined amaximum of $100,000, and face a one year prison term,with an additional year of parole.

The Makah Tribal Court has also charged Gonzales,Noel, Johnson, Parker and Secor with violating tribal law,and the tribal hearing took place on the 11th of Decem-ber. The men have been accused of violating the MakahTribe’s Gray Whale Management Plan, violating variousstate and federal laws, and reckless endangerment for fir-ing high-powered rifles over water. If the tribal court findsthe defendants guilty, they face a maximum of one yearin tribal prison, a $5,000 fine and a potential three yearloss of their treaty rights (which would include the rightto fish). The tribal case will be heard on January 22nd.

In both the federal and tribal hearings, the five de-

are no restrictions for Tanner and Cortez banks, theWestfall seamount, or low visibility operations, but pas-sive acoustical detection systems have to be working.Trained observers have to be posted at least one hourbefore and throughout sonar transmissions. Sonar mustbe turned off if any marine mammals appear within a2,200 yard buffer zone around the transmitting vessel.

See the photo below and think: under the best of con-ditions this is all those observers might see of a beakedwhale, known to be vulnerable to sonar. How would theysee this, or a turtle’s head, in rough seas or fog a kilome-ter away?

The Navy currently uses 29 procedures for avoidingharm to marine mammals; some are simply nonsense,such as the example above of visually detecting whales

The U.S. Navy must restrict mid-frequency sonaroperations off Southern California. U.S. District JudgeFlorence-Marie Cooper’s ruling in early January reflectedher years of study of the sonar’s impacts on marine ani-mals, and the national security needs for operational so-nar training. Her ruling was a balance between those con-flicting interests, and hopefully settled a lawsuit broughtby the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) andmany others, including CSI. Expect the Navy to appeal,however, as they have already during this case that be-gan in August.

Mitigations now imposed include no-sonar zones,such as a 12 nautical mile coastal zone, and the CatalinaBasin, an underwater canyon between Santa Catalina Is-land and the Navy-owned San Clemente Island. There

fendants pleaded not guilty, and were released withoutposting bail.

The Makah have tried to justify their desire to huntwhales by arguing that they had a continual history ofwhaling into the early 20th century. Yet at almost the verytime that Swann’s “bright star of Tatoosh” was being built,the Makah turned away from whaling in order to pursueother economic ventures. Historian T.T. Waterman wrotethat the Makah left off whaling for a period of decades inorder to pursue more profitable activities, including pe-lagic fur sealing. CSI continues to urge the Makah Tribeto consider ending their current pursuit of gray whalehunting, and turn instead to the more lucrative, non-con-sumptive use of whales through well-managed whalewatch tourism.

If there is any light shining out from such a dark inci-dent, it might be that the National Marine Fisheries Ser-vice seems to have further delayed the environmentalimpact statement (EIS) process that is required beforeNMFS can grant the Makah permission to hunt. In 2002,the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had ordered that no graywhales could be killed until the tribe had obtained awaiver under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. NMFShad been in the final stages of drafting the EIS, and thisseems to have been put on hold for at least some timeuntil the court findings against the five have been deter-mined. Hopefully, this delay will give NMFS the time toreconsider what has been a contentious and mismanagedwhale kill.

Restrictions on Navy SonarBy William Rossiter


or turtles a kilometer away in the dark! But it’s the bestwe’ve got to work with. As reflected in the court’s deci-sion, the simple mitigation measures sought by theNRDC-led coalition included: adopting larger safetyzones to protect marine mammals close to sonar ships;avoiding key whale habitat; and seasonally avoiding thegrey whale migratory routes. The judge doubled the pre-sonar monitoring time to one hour, but did not requirereducing sonar power during times of low visibility. TheNavy earlier had rebuked the CCC’s request for thesemitigations. The court’s finding supports thecommission’s position that these mitigations are neces-sary to bring the Navy’s exercises into compliance withCalifornia’s coastal laws.

The Navy’s war with marine life in California’s richand diverse waters near Channel Islands National Parkbegan in 2006, when the California Coastal Commission(CCC) disagreed with active sonar training plans for 2007-2009, and requested some changes. CCC has unusuallypowerful, and necessary, jurisdiction over what goes onin the state’s waters, but the Navy clearly objected to astate agency telling them what to do. Since CSI’s experi-ence began in 1996 the Navy has always fought beingtold what to do; it’s their line in the sand. Pulling out thebig guns, the Navy obtained from the deputy secretary of

Both these images were taken by Dr. Ingrid Visser in

Blainville’s beaked whale, courtesy of Colin MacLeod

California gray whale, courtesy of James Dorsey

Here’s a test: Can you tell these two species apart?

CITES and Solomon IslandsBy William Rossiter

defense a formal exemption to the Marine Mammal Pro-tection Act (MMPA). NRDC filed suit in August, joinedby CSI, the International Fund for Animal Welfare,League for Coastal Protection, Ocean Futures Society,Jean-Michel Cousteau and the CCC. The case bouncedback and forth, confusing non-legal minds, but the es-sence is this: Does the Navy’s definition of “national se-curity” relieve them from following the law? Their re-sponse to being told “no” has been to get the lawschanged. Is the Navy protecting the nation or themselves?Without venturing into political commentary, where willthe Navy draw their line in the sand if the next adminis-tration is not so supportive?

Legal battles will continue, with the Navy fightingevery challenge to sonar operations, playing the odds ofwinning in court, but certainly never surrendering to theenvironmentalists. Meanwhile, the Navy certainly spendsa lot of money on research, and CSI hopes they learnhow to avoid whales when sonar is in use, at least fortests and training.

CSI cannot express enough gratitude for the wisdomand skill exhibited by NRDC, our leaders in this and sev-eral other sonar lawsuits. Beyond saving marine life thedecision demands that the Navy accept the challenge todefend national security while obeying the law, not usetheir definition of national security to do whatever theywant.


Papua New Guinea.

These are bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus.

These are mother and calf Indo-Pacific bottlenosedolphins, Tursiops aduncus.

Yes, there are visual differences, such as the longerbeak in most T. aduncus, the DNA and bones show dif-ferences, and the two species are reproductively isolated,but T. aduncus was not widely accepted among scientistsuntil 2000. On the water few people can make the dis-tinction. But the distinction is extremely significant formanagement purposes, for example to define the vulner-ability of populations.

And that brings us to the dolphin trade by SolomonIslands, to Mexico in 2003 and to Dubai last October18th (see October’s Whales Alive! newsletter on CSI’sweb site). CSI has contacted the world’s experts on thisspecies and every one shares our concern:

The Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins found inSolomon Island waters live in small, isolated groups,usually as year-round residents using a variety of coastalhabitats near home islands. Individuals born to one popu-lation very rarely migrate to others; if a population suf-fers a major calamity it is not likely that other dolphinswill fill the void.

However, Solomon Islands officially permit 100 dol-

phins to be exported per year. To fill that quota localpeople using primitive methods injure or kill hundredsof dolphins, and many social units are destroyed. Selectedsurvivors are transported long distances in open boats toa captivity facility, where they are further culled by ill-ness, death, or just by being released in waters too farfrom their home waters to survive. From the moment ofcapture all these dolphins are as good as dead as far asthe survival of their populations in concerned.

None of the scientific authorities CSI has contactedknew of any minimally adequate research published onthese dolphin populations; much of the populations’ struc-ture is implied from research on similar populations else-where in the region. We particularly thank Dr. John Y.Wang, co-author of the species chapter in the 2nd Edi-tion of the Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals, now be-ing printed, for his earnest expertise and certainty aboutthe research that has been accomplished.

But while the world’s best scientists confirm that noone knows how many Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphinslive in Solomon Island waters, or what the local popula-tions are like, Solomon Islanders say they know. Thattraditional, local “knowledge” has convinced the gov-ernment that these captures are sustainable. In truth, theydo not care; the species is considered a pest in many ar-eas, and has almost none of the value that spinner, spot-ted and other cetaceans have as meat, and for teeth val-ued for bridal dowries. One source panned the bottle-nose dolphin as “tasting bad.”

So everyone was astonished when some entrepreneursshowed up with big promises of lots of money, just forselling this pest species on the international captive dis-play market. The first shipment, to Mexico in 2003, didnot fulfill the promises, but with the skillful manipula-tions of a supportive minister the government waited outinternational condemnation, joined CITES, learned howto say the right things, and firmed expectations of lots ofincome from this amazing trade opportunity.

Who can blame them? We are not wasting your timeor our space with details of how the Solomon Islandsdolphin market got where it is today, much less the gov-ernment turnovers and intrigue, but it has been a sad,fascinating experience for us to study the struggles of asociety plagued by social violence and unrest, three gov-ernment upheavals since 2003, and the corrupting influ-ence of outsiders with promises of lots of money for alocally worthless animal. Why should they care if theirnew market threatens the core of CITES?

CSI must admit that, along with many other NGOs


and associates, the considerable effort since 2003 to tryto convince the Solomon Islands government not to al-low the captures or exports seems to have been wasted.Some in our coalition braved violent security to uncoverthe doings of the company making all this happen, Ma-rine Mammal Education Centre and Exporters Limited,and the dark history and connections of the people in-volved. We all tried to alert the Mexican and recently theDubai authorities about the questionable aspects of thetrade, including the significant issue of disease transmis-sion.

The raw power of money both separates and linksDubai and Solomon Islands. Solomon Islands is resource-rich and money-poor, while Dubai is so oil-rich thenation’s explosive development to date proves that any-thing is possible if the cost is irrelevant. Both nations areequally unfazed by international concerns and equallyefficient at keeping prying eyes away from their dolphins.Little did we know that the Solomon Islands–Dubai tradehad been planned since 2004! We suspect shipments toDubai and China are due, but have no clue when or wherethe dolphins will end up. And so we turned to the realauthorities:

We pleaded with the CITES Secretariat and other in-ternational entities to communicate to Solomon Islandsseveral questions about the clear absence of scientificevidence supposedly necessary to substantiate key CITESrequirements. All we had asked for was a quiet, diplo-matic query to the Solomon Islands CITES ManagementAuthority, well within the Secretariat’s purview. Insteadthe response by the CITES Secretariat may have beenthe prime reason for the trade succeeding. Because ofapparent misconceptions the Secretariat not only did notcommunicate any hesitancy about the impending trade,and certainly not any recommendation against the ex-port, as we mistakenly reported in October’s WhalesAlive!, but instead made statements and comments in tacitsupport of the trade!

Comments from the Secretariat included severalalarming misconceptions about this trade, appearing, forexample, to ignore at least two formal CITES Resolu-tions, and to minimize the trade of 100 by lumping to-gether all dolphins in the region, discounting the CSGscientific expertise, adding in the killing of other speciesin bycatches or for food, and confusing the populationdetriment issue with concerns by animal welfare organi-zations over captive display. It must be noted that CSIknows of no concerns communicated to the Secretariatby any organization relating this issue to captive display

issues.These comments and statements so alarmed scien-

tists, governments and Non-Governmental Organizations(NGOs) that, in addition to behind-the-scenes responses,a formal rebuttal was published by the Species SurvivalNetwork (SSN) and WWF International. As a member ofSSN, a coalition of over 80 international NGOs, CSIhelped to draft the rebuttal. The “Statement of the Spe-cies Survival Network and WWF International onSolomon Islands Dolphin Exports” was very carefullyworded and fully vetted, yet unavoidably concluded that:“We are concerned that, in this instance, the Secretary-General’s misunderstandings have caused the CITESSecretariat to issue judgments and statements that ignorethe specific context of this trade, and the intent of CITESResolutions regarding the need for science as a basis fordecisions regarding sustainable exports. We fully sup-port the CITES treaty, whose very essence is the scien-tifically-based issuance of non-detriment findings. Weurge the Parties to address this issue.”

For the full text see: http://www.ssn.org/Documents/news_articles_SI_exports_EN.htm, or downloaded as aPDF at: http://www.ssn.org/Documents/SSN_WWF_SI_Rebuttal.pdf.

It is meaty stuff crammed into eight pages, but wellworth your time, because this issue is much more impor-tant than just the trade of dolphins: to CSI and many oth-ers it represents a violation of the spirit and intent ofCITES, by weakening the degree of protection suppos-edly afforded by CITES to many species of plants andanimals. It is a signal to other nations and entrepreneursthat they also can get away with trading exotic animalsand plants from vulnerable, endangered and CITES-listedpopulations; it is also likely to be detrimental to the iso-lated populations of these dolphins from which the cap-tures are made, as there is no scientific evidence that thesecaptures are sustainable; and of course it is also an ani-mal welfare issue to CSI, with hundreds of dolphins dy-ing, injured or lost to their populations, while the survi-vors suffer in captivity.

Without hyperbole CSI believes that the door has beenflung open for an expansion of dolphin captures frommany Pacific island nations for sale to captive displayfacilities worldwide, as well as detrimental trades of manyvulnerable species. While we wait for the Secretariat’sreportedly furious rebuttal of our rebuttal, we must askwhy no CITES Parties, no member nations, have startedthe process of repairing the damage done by the Secre-tariat.


Cetacean News

Remember the Taiji Five, and protest future orcacaptures in Japan! February 7th is the 11th anniversaryof the capture near Taiji, Japan of an entire pod of tenorcas. The older five were released, but their pod wasleft with no young females and likely has been destroyed.Only one of the five young whales kept for sale to cap-tive display facilities is alive today. The horror is aboutto happen again; Japan is preparing to permit more orcacaptures. What can you do? See and support http://www.SaveJapanDolphins.org/ and http://www.bluevoice.org/, then send a fax or email protesting anyeffort to permit orcas to be captured in Taiji, or any otherport in Japan, as CSI and 147 other organizations havealready done. We are asking you to protest the past andfuture captures to the specific officials. Your protestcounts. Your protest is needed. Here’s who to contact:

Mr. Shuji Yamada, Director-General of FisheriesAgency of Japan& Chief of Whaling Section at Far Seas FisheriesDivision in Fisheries Agency of Japan1-2-1 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 100-8907JapanFax: +81-3-3591-5824

Mr. Ichiro Kamoshita, Minister of the EnvironmentThe Ministry of the Environment, Government ofJapanGodochosha No.5, Kasumigaseki 1-2-2, Chiyoda-ku,Tokyo, 100-8975 JapanFax: +81-3-3581-3003

Mr. Masahiko Koumura, Minister of Foreign AffairsThe Ministry of Foreign AffairsKasumigaseki 2-2-1, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 100-8919JapanFax: +81-3-5501-8128

Chief of Whaling SectionFar Seas Fisheries Division in Fisheries Agency ofJapan1-2-1 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 100-8907Japan

For background, a November symposium in Tokyotitled “The Present Situation of Orcas and Plans for theirBreeding” brought together all the display facilities and

supportive agencies for the purpose of discussing the cap-ture of more orcas. Representatives were there from Ja-pan Fisheries Agency, Taiji town mayor, Port of NagoyaPublic Aquarium, Izumito Sea Paradise, Nanki ShirahamaAdventure World, Taiji Whale Museum, Whale Confer-ence in JAZA, the Institute of Cetacean Research, theNational Research Institute of Far Seas Fisheries, TokyoKaiyou University, Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium,Minamichita Beach Land, Shimonoseki Aquarium andKamogawa Sea World.

Only eight orcas have survived in three aquariums inJapan. The average captive lifespan has been only 6.7years, including one almost 22. While Kamogawa SeaWorld has six orcas, from successful captive breeding,Taiji Whale Museum and Port of Nagoya Public Aquariumhave one each; hence the pressure to catch wild orcas.

There is no reliable data on orca populations andstocks near Japan, but the symposium professionals con-vinced themselves orca numbers have gradually increasedsince the 1970s. It is known that 1,516 orcas were cap-tured in Japan between 1948 and 1971, with another 78captured by 1997, before a ban on captures for displaywas imposed. Permitted captures after 1997 have beenfor “scientific research”, but they are really for captivedisplay.

At least 85 southern right whales had stranded inArgentina between June and November. 42, mostlycalves, were recorded by the end of September. Alarm-ingly high by Northern hemisphere standards, where lessthan 400 right whales survive, 42 is consistent with pre-vious years’ strandings during calving seasons in the re-gion, where over 1000 right whales were counted in Au-gust alone. 2005 was highest, with 47 strandings, but thenumbers have grown generally at the same 7% rate asthe population.

But the later-stranded whales had died in the waternear Península Valdés in late October, victims of abiotoxin, dominic acid, in a dinoflagellate bloom whichcolored large swaths of the ocean’s surface green. As theOctober strandings began a massive response was started,coordinated by specialists with the Southern Right WhaleHealth Monitoring Program and Instituto de Conservaciónde Ballenas, and Chubut Province government officials.Besides regional support, the effort was joined by sev-eral experts from the U.S., who then missed the annualmeeting of the Right Whale Consortium in November.

The stranding response effort drew down the re-sources available for future scientific work. You can help


this important work continue by adopting a southern rightwhale! For more information, please visit: http://www.icb.org.ar/.

The Second Latin American Meeting on the Con-servation of Cetaceans was held in Buenos Aires, Ar-gentina in mid-December. Representatives of 15 LatinAmerican governments discussed many cetacean conser-vation issues. Included were IWC Commissioners fromArgentina, Brazil, Mexico, Panama and Peru, as well asthe Alternate Commissioner from Chile, ambassadorsfrom El Salvador and Nicaragua, diplomatic observersfrom Uruguay and Venezuela, and representatives fromColombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Honduras and Domini-can Republic.

Called the Buenos Aires Group, participants agreedto a Declaration that stressed the Latin American Coop-eration Strategy for the Conservation of Cetaceans, con-solidating and coordinating the policy, technical and sci-entific views of the regional nations. They emphasizedthe IWC’s need to create South Atlantic and South Pa-cific Whale Sanctuaries; reaffirmed the validity of thewhaling moratorium; stressed the need to strengthen theparticipation of scientists from the region in the differentWorking Groups; expressed their rejection of the lethalscientific capture and commercial whaling activities;expressed the relevance of working on animal welfareissues; supported the work of the Mexican governmenttowards the protection of the Vaquita; and emphasizedthe participation of the society as a whole in accompany-ing the work of the member governments of the Buenos

Aires Group regarding cetacean conservation.The Group represents the welcome emergence of ef-

fective world leadership in cetacean conservation mat-ters, particularly in a region undergoing extraordinarychange and pressure. CSI was most pleased to see sev-eral officials and participants at the meeting that CSI hadhelped with small grants and other assistance early intheir careers; we have always believed that our grant pro-gram is an investment in the best people that will do greatthings, and we are very pleased to see such superb peoplesucceed.

Speaking of CSI’s Grants program, we acknowl-edge with gratitude the generous support of the Frederick& Margaret L. Weyerhaeuser Foundation, individual di-rected donors, and in particular an anonymous founda-tion, for enabling CSI to give 78 grants in 2007, from$500 to over $5,000, primarily to Latin America and theCaribbean. Each grant is an investment in people help-ing cetaceans, through science, conservation and educa-tion. In addition CSI helps these and many others withcontacts, resources, moral support, and occasionally adonated laptop or camera (hint).

As an example of CSI’s often innovative approach togiving, Valerie Lounsbury and the National Aquarium inBaltimore kindly donated copies of Marine MammalsAshore, as both books and CDs of this acclaimed profes-sional stranding response guide. CSI continues to dis-tribute them on request to specialists in Latin Americaand the Caribbean, the Pacific Rim, Africa and Russia.In some remote regions we know these resources willhelp start up agencies and workers, eventually limitingthe suffering of stranded marine animals, educating thepublic and advancing scientific knowledge.

The M/S Explorer sank in Antarctica on Novem-ber 23rd, near the South Shetland Islands. Everyoneonboard was rescued before the ship sank over 1,000meters to the bottom carrying 185,000 liters of diesel fuel,24,000 liters of lubricants, and 1,200 liters of gasoline. Itdid not matter that she was a well-tested, ice-strength-ened Antarctic cruise ship; within 3 days Chilean offi-cials reported a surface oil slick 1.5 km long. The flow tosurface continued even as the slick dispersed, partly fromstirring efforts by a Chilean icebreaker. Some oil mayhave been trapped under surface ice. Oil spills can betreated chemically in warmer waters, but we are helplessspoilers here. While cruise ship operators will check theirvessels’ insurance and focus on the possible loss of tour-

Pictured here in happier times is a southern right whalewatching people! The whale-watches in this area providesignificant local income, but are not without controversy.

Photo courtesy of Graciela Keidansky.


ists who do not want to drown, the flood of people eagerto witness this magical place will continue to increase,as will pressures to profit from resources.

CSI is a member of the Antarctic and Southern OceanCoalition (ASOC), which consists of NGOs and expertsthat share our concern for this increasingly vulnerablevestige of remoteness on our tiny world. ASOC formallyparticipates in meetings of governments and scientists,speaking for the environment. We know that oil in thesea can be degraded by physical, chemical and biologi-cal processes acting on them. Some of these processescause the oil to “disappear”. But it does not, as anyonecan tell you who turns over a rock on a beach despoiledyears ago by the Exxon Valdez.

Who will clean up and pay for the Antarctic acci-dent? The past provides examples: The Argentine Navy

Spong, founder of OrcaLab - a small land-based researchstation in B. C. and a video monitoring station on CracroftPoint in Johnstone Strait (http://www.orcalab.org/). Spongstates, “Many of the orcas of the Northern Resident com-munity (25 percent of the population) ingested toxic die-sel oil vapors, by inhalation, over a considerable periodof time”. Finally, three months after the spill, investiga-tion of the spill had begun with a government contractedmini-sub operated by Nuytco Research which had locatedand documented all the equipment that sank 350 m to theocean floor. Evidence of the spill was still apparent whencrew members encountered petroleum on the surface ofthe water on two out of the three afternoons of the initialinvestigation. Contrastingly, the U.S. Coast Guard’s re-sponse to the spill of 53,000 to 58,000 gallons of bunkeroil in San Francisco Bay in November was also criti-cized. Although the attorney for the vessel said that thepilot notified authorities immediately, it took cleanupcrews at least 90 minutes to respond.

Environmentalists are calling for stricter regulationsfor tugboats pulling barges through British Columbia’swaterways. Although a moratorium exists on tanker traf-fic in this area, environmentalists claim the Robson Bightspill is an example of how unprepared British Columbiais for planned oil exploration on that coast. Initially, thefederal and provincial governments were divided onwhether or not an underwater investigation should takeplace in Robson Bight. The province supported the in-

Eclipsed by the larger and more publicized diesel spillin San Francisco, CA bay, an imminently more danger-ous spill had gone unchecked since August 20th in Brit-ish Columbia’s Johnstone Strait Robson Bight MichaelBigg Ecological Reserve. The reserve, set aside as thefirst whale sanctuary in the world in 1982, is critical habi-tat for the Northern Resident killer whales. A barge car-rying heavy logging equipment and a fuel truck contain-ing 10,000 liters of diesel fuel went down leaving oilstretching on the surface for 14 kilometers, and leakinghydraulic fluid contained in the equipment in the path ofdozens of the Northern Resident population of orcas whotravel the narrow channel between Vancouver Island andthe mainland. The spill occurred 886 meters inside thereserve boundary.

One upside to the disaster is that the spilled oil wasnot heavy crude; diesel fuel evaporates rapidly, but notquickly enough for 50-plus Northern Resident killerwhales that had been seen swimming in and out of thediesel-laden waters. Officials stated booms were initiallyplaced around the slick so that no oil made it to the criti-cal “rubbing beach” where orcas rub their bodies on thesmooth pebbles, but the imminent harm to the whaleshas yet to be calculated.

Environmentalists and whale advocates were out-raged by the relatively belated response to the spill; as ofthis writing, cleanup has not begun. Response was “de-layed, fragmented and ineffective”, according to Dr. Paul

Oil Spill in Robson Bight, British Columbia Whale SanctuaryBy Patricia Sullivan, CSI Board

re-supply ship Bahia Paraiso ran aground off the Antarc-tic Peninsula in 1989, releasing about 3 1/2 times thefuel the Explorer took to the bottom. Argentine, Dutchand U.S. clean-up efforts cost over $7,000,000, but li-ability and cooperation were clearly established. The M/S Explorer, owned by the Canadian company G.A.P. Ad-ventures and licensed in Liberia, is not part of a nationalAntarctic program. The 2005 Annex on “EnvironmentalLiability Arising from Environmental Emergencies” wasadded to the Environmental Protocol, establishing respon-sibilities and liability in the case of an environmentalemergency, such as an oil spill. Sounds good, but themajority of the Antarctic Treaty Parties have not ratifiedthe Annex.

Perhaps G.A.P Adventures will do the right thing andclean up their mess, but...


vestigation, while the Coast Guard and EnvironmentCanada did not (Livingoceans.org).

Oil spills of this magnitude can be catastrophic tocetaceans; oil fumes can be ingested in cetaceans’ lungsand cause lung lesions or induce pneumonia. Anotherdeadly consequence is fish toxicity; orcas eat salmon andother fish that store toxic pollutants they absorb from theenvironment in their bodies. “As a result of eating thesecontaminated fish, Puget Sound killer whales have someof the highest concentrations of highly carcinogenic poly-chlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) of any marine mammal inthe world”, according to Gary Wiles, a wildlife biologistwith the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(Orcas, main page). Unlike other oiled creatures such asbirds, seals or penguins (if the animals survived the stressand trauma, and if rescue organizations can reach them),there is little hope to remove oil from dolphins, porpoisesor whales, or avoid the inevitable injury and harm result-ing from a spill. Diesel related symptoms may take monthsor years to appear. Orcalab’s Dr. Paul Spong states, “Wewill be holding our collective breath at the beginning ofthe 2008 orca ‘season’, watching each family of orcas asit arrives ... counting, and hoping.”

The spill in this whale sanctuary adds obscene insultto injury; a combination of pollution, global warming,heavy boat traffic and the decline of wild chinook salmonis already affecting the southern resident orcas, declaredfederally endangered by the National Marine FisheriesService (NMFS). The Northern Resident community isalso affected by the decline in salmon; when West Coastwild chinook stocks plummeted in the mid-1990s, the

61 separate groups. At least 34 of the sounds reoccurredbetween groups and 21 were similar to bits from songs.

This vocabulary will not satisfy the mystics but itblew away the scientists. Despite decades of words writ-ten about humpback songs, little has been said about thesocial sounds of humpbacks. Deep in the paper is thecaveat that: “These (statistical analysis) parameters, be-lieved to be important to human observers, may not nec-essarily be of importance to the whales.” The media, natu-rally, could not be so restrained. One Reuters headlineproclaimed that “Australian Scientists Decode WhaleSounds”.

This distinguished but overdue research narrowly

The social vocalization repertoire of east Austra-lian migrating humpback whales is a scientific explo-ration of whale sounds that actually discusses what whalesmight be communicating to each other; courageous stuff!The study, authored by Rebecca A. Dunlop, Michael J.Noad, Douglas H. Cato, and Dale Stokes, was first pre-sented over a year ago at the Fourth Joint Meeting of theAcoustical Society of America and Acoustical Society ofJapan, and finally published in the Journal of the Acous-tical Society of America 122 (5) November 2007 (http://www.acoustics.org/press/152nd/dunlop.html).

Thousands of hours of recordings of humpbacks mi-grating by Queensland, Australia found 660 sounds from

northern resident population went from 219 to 202. “Mor-tality in some years was 300 percent greater than we ex-pected,” says John K.B. Ford of Fisheries and OceansCanada - Canada’s lead federal manager of oceans andinland waters - who has studied killer whales for 30 years(Orcas, main page). The Northern Resident populationcontains 16 pods (A1, A4, A5, B1, C1, D1, H1, I1, I2,I18, G1, G12, I11, I31, R1, and W1) that reside primarilyfrom central Vancouver Island (including the northernStrait of Georgia) to Frederick Sound in southeasternAlaska, although animals occasionally venture as farsouth as the Strait of Juan de Fuca, San Juan Islands, andthe west coast of Washington. From June to October, manyNorthern Resident pods congregate in the vicinity ofJohnstone Strait and Queen Charlotte Strait off north-eastern Vancouver Island (NMFS).

Livingoceans.org (2007). Robson bight barge spill. Re-trieved December 31, 2007 from http://www.livingoceans.org/newsevents/clippings2.shtml

National Marine Fisheries Service. 2006. Proposed re-covery plan for southern resident killer whales (Orcinusorca). National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Re-gion, Seattle, Washington. Retrieved on December 31,2007 from http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/recovery/proposed_killerwhale.pdf

OrcaLab News (2007). Retrieved December 28, 2007from http://www.orcalab.org/news-archive/orcalab_general/07-12-21.html

Humpback CommunicationBy William Rossiter


avoids becoming cute with their words chosen to describethe humpbacks’ sounds. Clearly, describing sounds is anart, not a science: “Ther-wop” and “Wop” were “com-mon but brief harmonic upsweeps” below 60 Hz. “Wop”seemed similar to the “simple moans” from humpbacksin southeast Alaska, while in Australia it was most com-mon with mothers with calves, and may be a contact call.One particularly vocal mother-calf and escort repeatedeight rhythmic “ascending cries”, lower in frequency butotherwise similar to the acoustically choreographed callsof hunting parties of Alaskan humpbacks. “Snorts” and“grumbles” were also low frequency, while mid-fre-quency harmonic sounds included “sirens”, “shortmoans”, “horns” and “violins”. Longer harmonic soundsincluded “groans”, “ascending moans”, “modulatedmoans” “cries” “modulated cries” “ascending cries”, and“trumpet.” High-frequency harmonic “shrieks” or“squeaks” were contextually linked with disagreements.Amplitude-modulated sounds included “growls” and“purrs”. Males made “purrs” when courting females, soof course the media described them as “C’mon baby”calls. Broadband, “noisy” and complex sounds includedprobable underwater blows, described as “barks,” “bel-lows,” and “creaks,” while repetitive sounds included“grunts,” “croaks,” “pulses” and “low yaps”.

The big news was that social sounds and bits fromsongs seem to be interchangeable. The study suggestedthat all social sounds might have come from songs, orsongs from the sounds. Because of conditions, only themost obvious behaviors could be linked with sounds, suchas when single males joining groups switched from low-frequency sounds to higher frequency song-like harmonicsounds. Would this be like humming a few bars of a hittune as you join a party?

This research will be read from many perspectives.Let’s squeeze a few thoughts from this research and rum-mage on the edge of science, without getting mystical ormushy: does the suggestion that humpbacks might saysomething about themselves or their environment leaveyou thrilled or threatened? Why does something so ex-pected need science to make it real?

Because science documents, and occasionally ex-plains, reality, we now know that humpbacks and hu-mans are not alone: give homage to Alex, the legendarygray parrot, or Koko, the signing gorilla who, as the re-searcher would go home at the end of their day, wouldplead: “please don’t go; I’ll cry”, or the orcas with dia-lects and ceremony, or the many examples of cultureamong an increasing list of creatures. But it is all rela-

tively new information; Just a generation ago peoplefound solace in their thumbs, which allowed humans tobe the only tool users. Turns out non-human tool usersare everywhere, and in the last few years non-human self-awareness and even some suggestions of abstract thoughtalso have been found hidden in plain sight. People need-ing the solace of superiority are having an increasinglytough time, and the trend is clear. The real question iswhere to look.

So someone finally looked for, and found, that hump-backs share widely understood labels for things or feel-ings, and they use these labels while singing rhymes. Thisnews is millions of years old. The real news is that some-one finally looked for something already there. Lots moreto do: We still have to learn if the song is about the la-bels, and if some labels mean “me” and “you”.

What an opportunity for young researchers, to ac-cept the challenge to study a different humpback popula-tion in clear waters, where behaviors and sounds can bedocumented in unambiguous context. This is alreadybeing done, carefully, with several dolphin projects. Willthey find the different meanings for sounds adopted bydifferent populations, and explore the cultural implica-tions?

If the future enlightens us with humpback gossip orsagas will there still be people who will want to kill them?What would humpbacks say of whaling? Would the whal-ers listen?

A young humpback whale summering in Antarctica.Photo courtesy of Luciana Möller.


Book ReviewsBy William Rossiter

the cause of cetacean protection. You have, with thecontinual help of other officers and board members,brought the society to new heights of cetacean advo-cacy, nationally and internationally, and empowered thesociety to provide transformative support for literallyhundreds of pioneer cetacean researchers around theglobe. Whether dealing with issues of InternationalWhaling Commission policy, the U.S. Navy’s Sonar“War on Whales,” cetacean captivity and internationaldolphin trade actions, lethal whale research, dolphinslaughter, ocean pollution and toxic poisoning, yourleadership and expertise have given CSI a powerfulvoice and earned world-wide respect beyond measure.We have been sought after as co-litigants in critical fed-eral law suits. Your boundless energy and tireless ef-forts, involving round-the-clock utilization of Internetinformation and communication, have kept CSI in theforefront of global cetacean conservation, education,and research.

So once again, our deepest thanks, take care, Godbless, and carry on.

Robbins

As 2007 draws to its close, I am writing you onbehalf of the CSI Board of Directors, our entire mem-bership, and all the world’s cetaceans, to thank you foryour truly outstanding leadership of this small but dedi-cated organization and for your continually bringingabout the making of a difference so greatly out of pro-portion to our size and resources.

The Cetacean Society International, originally theConnecticut Cetacean Society, was founded in Marchof 1974. For 18 years, until 1992, Donald Sineti servedas President, and I was Volunteer Executive Director.You were elected Vice-President in October 1983, uponthe resignation of Frank Gardner, of the West HartfordChildren’s Museum. You served continuously in thatposition for ten years, including the 2-year presidencyof Leslie Shields (1992-1994), and then you assumedthe presidency in 1994, while I became Director Emeri-tus. For 14 years now, you have been our president,effectively fulfilling also, still on a totally volunteerbasis, the no-longer-titled role of executive director.

During all this time, over a record total now of 24years as president or vice-president, you have extendedyourself in more ways than can be counted to advance

One Dolphin’s Story, The Life and Times of an East-ern Tropical Pacific Spinner Dolphin, is authored byStanley Minasian, a name so familiar to whale advocatesthat you just know the book will be excellent, and it is.Readers will be taken along from the birth of a femaledolphin, through a fast-paced, lyrical narrative that fol-lows her life, while combining exciting drama with thenewest scientific information. Along the way Minasianmixes in some of the yet-to-be proven yet obvious per-ceptions of a highly social dolphin whose experiencesare so different from ours. Beyond being out there amongthe dolphins for a short while, the greatest value fromthis book is that you will know what these dolphins gothrough to live, and be moved to help them.

Thanks To CSI President William W. RossiterA Personal Tribute Letter from CSI Director Emeritus Dr. Robbins Barstow

Thousand Mile Song, Whale Music In a Sea ofSound, by David Rothenberg, won’t be available untilMarch, but it’s got to be an outstanding choice for any-one moved by the sounds and songs of whales. Davidspent many months researching whale songs, helped bymany prominent researchers who brought him along tolisten, as well as his own musical talents as a composerand jazz clarinetist and his magnificent warm-up towhales: Why Birds Sing, which has been published in sixlanguages and turned into a TV documentary by the BBC.His new book includes a CD of David’s attempts to makeinterspecies music, as he plays his clarinet with whalesin Russia, Canada and Hawaii. Expect to get a stimulat-ing and entertaining mix of science, music, and philoso-phy, and a richer and more meaningful listening experi-ence.


CSI’s Annual Meeting on 28 January 2008

know.• Current and previous issues of Whales Alive! as well

as our Photo Gallery and other features can be found onCSI’s web site. Check it out at:

csiwhalesalive.org

• Individualized photographic certificates are nowavailable for new CSI members. If we know their favor-ite species of whale or dolphin we will use an appropri-ate and dramatic image as a background. These are par-ticularly suited to gift memberships, so if you know ofsomeone who might enjoy being part of CSI please let us

Current Board Alternates:Jennifer Almquist, New Preston, CTLea Brown, Bridgeport, CTLen Brown, Bridgeport, CTTom Callinan, Norwich, CTStephen Chelminski, Antrim, NHGeorge Chmael, Annapolis, MDBrian Chmielecki, Taftville, CTMichelle Ferreira, Wasilla, AKRalph Formica, Cromwell, CTJeffrey Mills, Coventry, CTCynthia G. O’Connell, West Hartford, CTJean Rioux, East Hartford, CTHeather Rockwell, Marston Mills, MASteve Roys, Winsted, CTSue Wachtelhausen, Wethersfield, CTFred Wenzel, Sandwich, MA

CSI’s Annual Membership Meeting will be held at6:00 P.M. on Monday, 28 January 2008, at the Olive Gar-den Italian Restaurant, 1441 New Britain Ave., West Hart-ford, CT. Directions: From east, take I-84 exit 40, bearleft under I-84, at the light go straight into the shoppingarea (Sears), circle right until you see Olive Garden. Fromwest, take I-84 exit 40, at end of ramp turn right, at thelight turn left into the shopping center, stay to right untilyou reach Olive Garden.

In addition to the fun part of the evening, we willelect CSI’s officers and board members for 2008. Forreference, the current officers and board members arelisted below. Additional nominees from the floor will beopen for all. Come and hear about CSI’s activities in 2007and plans for 2008, and enjoy good food and fellowship.All members and friends of CSI are welcome and en-couraged to attend. Please contact Barbara Kilpatrick tolet her know you are coming, at [email protected] 860-561-0187.

Current Officers:President: William W. Rossiter, Redding, CTVice-President: Brent Hall, Cheshire, CTSecretary: Jessica L. Dickens, Hartford, CTTreasurer: Barbara Kilpatrick, West Hartford, CT

Current Board Of Directors:Deborah Adams, New Richmond, OHNancy Azzam, Golden Valley, MNPaul J. Digangi, East Hartford, CTMartha Fitzgerald, Hartford, CTDavid Kaplan Esq., West Hartford, CTPaul Knapp, Jr., Lake Wales, FLA. Daniel Knaub, Mechanicsburg, PAKate O’Connell, West Hartford, CTPatricia Sullivan, East Hartford, CTGeorge A. Upton, Glastonbury, CTNathalie Ward, Woods Hole, MATaffy L. Williams, Tuckahoe, NY

Back row: Brent Hall, Paul Digangi, Robbins Barstow, MegBarstow, Barbara Kilpatrick. Front row: William Rossiter,

Patricia Sullivan, Jean Rioux, Jessica Dickens, MarthaFitzgerald. The Board members who “call in” are

represented by the speaker phone that Jessica is holding.

Cetacean Society Internationalc/o Brent Hall460 Wallingford RoadCheshire, CT 06410U.S.A.

FIRST CLASS MAIL

Wouldn't you rather be visiting with the friendly gray whales in Mexico? Photo courtesy of James Dorsey.

Vol. XVII No. 1 January 2008A publication of Cetacean ...csiwhalesalive.org/csi2008_01.pdf · Vol....

Documents

Transcript of Vol. XVII No. 1 January 2008A publication of Cetacean ...csiwhalesalive.org/csi2008_01.pdf · Vol....