Title: Assessing a public health justification for reducing whale consumption in northern Canada
Author: Jefferies, Cameron
Publication: Health Law Review
Collection Type: Article
Date: Sep 22, 2009
Words: 5579
Topics: Arctic peoples, Canadian native peoples, Health aspects, Child health, Health aspects, Delphinidae, Dolphins, Dolphins (Mammals), Electronic periodicals, Environmental law, Fish (Food product), Fish as food, Fishery conservation, Laws, regulations and rules, Food consumption, Laws, regulations and rules, Food habits, Government information technology, Government information technology services, Health care information services, Health risk assessment, Laws, regulations and rules, Heavy metals, Land use, Marine mammals, Marine resources conservation, Medical advice systems, Medical research, Medicine, Experimental, Methylmercury, Methylmercury compounds, Micropollutants, Nationalism, Persistent organic pollutants, Pollution control, Porpoises, Public health, Public health law, Evaluation, Sea ice, Trace pollutants, Trans fatty acids, Water pollution research, Whaling, Laws, regulations and rules

Introduction
At the start of the 21st century, the relationship between humans and cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises) is uncomfortable at best, and, most likely, in an utter state of disrepair. (1) It has not always been this way. Whaling for both cultural and commercial purposes has an extensive history throughout the world. Since the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) (2) was created in 1946 with the goal of “proper conservation of whale stocks … mak[ing] possible the orderly development of the whaling industry,” (3) both the international community and individual nation states have struggled to achieve sustainability in their whaling practices. In 1986, the International Whaling Commission (IWC), created pursuant to the ICRW with a mandate to “keep under review and revise as necessary the measures laid down in the schedule to the Convention which governs the conduct of whaling throughout the world”), established a controversial moratorium on commercial whaling. (4) By the time the IWC moratorium was introduced, Canada already had a domestic commercial moratorium in place but had previously withdrawn from the ICRW because of a dispute regarding Aboriginal bowhead whaling in the Arctic. (5) The IWC recognizes two exceptions to the commercial moratorium: (1) the “Aboriginal Subsistence” exemption which enables indigenous peoples from member nations to hunt for food and fulfill cultural traditions; and (2) the “Scientific Permit” exemption which allows member nations to grant whaling licenses to national research companies (Japan harvests approximately 1,000 whales annually in international waters under the guise of “Scientific Permit” whaling). (6) However, the ICRW lacks jurisdiction to regulate nations who are not party to the convention (like Canada) and, despite purporting to have jurisdiction over all whale species in all whaling waters, custom indicates that the IWC only regulates “great” species (such as grey whales, humpbacks, and ‘right’ whales) and will not regulate within a nation state’s 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) as described in Part V of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). (7) Recent whaling commentary has focused on Japanese “Scientific Permit” whaling and in response this paper demonstrates that pressing whaling issues in Canada also demand academic and political attention and, perhaps, regulatory reform.

The following analysis investigates the public health component of the human-cetacean relationship; specifically, whether health concerns surrounding the consumption of contaminated cetacean products warrant, international or domestic regulatory reform. Scientific analysis of whale meat for dangerous levels of mercury, persistent organic pollutants (POPs), and other toxins began as an attempt by environmental nongovernmental organizations (ENGOs) to link human health and whaling as justification for a complete whaling ban. (8) This proposed link has recently been subjected to rigorous scientific testing in Canada, Japan, and Greenland, confirming cetacean product contamination and advancing the hypothesis that regular or prolonged consumption can be acutely and chronically harmful. (9)

Public health is the “process of mobilizing local, state [provincial and federal], and international resources to solve the major health problems affecting communities.” (10) Public health concerns surrounding food and corresponding regulatory responses to safeguard populations from food-borne illness can be traced as far back as ancient Egyptian and Hebrew society. (11) Concerns regarding whale meat also engage the modern concept of “environmental health” which “comprises t