Debate Rounds (5)
Okay, so first of all: Just because the minke whales aren't endangered, doesn't mean that it doesn't hurt the species. There are many records of animals that used to be abundant, but then they slowly died out due to humans hunting them:
One of the most famous of these animals is the passenger pigeon. Billions of the birds used to be around, until humans hunted them to extinction.
And from many articles I've read, and everything I've heard as well, whaling is known as unquestionably cruel. The whales don't die "instantly" all the time. Even if it's 80%, there are still a significant number that suffer. Whales are able to slow their breathing and heart rate, so sometimes they can appear dead or unconscious, but instead they are feeling intense pain. They are often chased until exhausted, before they are harpooned a few, and they sometimes don't even die then. There's blood absolutely everywhere.
Actually, the whaling is quite unnecessary and uneconomical as well. The quota is 1286. But the years leading up to 2014 have had an increasingly less amount of whales caught. This could signal that the species is at the very beginning of running out, or, it's not quite as important.
Eating whale meat is quite uncommon, even if it meets the standards of mercury levels. It's way expensive, and most people see it as controversial.
And by the way, most of your sources are good, but I would advise against using Wikipedia as one of them. (I'm not being rude, I'm just pointing that out)
My opponent stated that whaling is very cruel. However, part of his source is written from 1946, when harpoon grenades were rudimentary black powder bombs, that killed slowly by lacerating wounds. These days, in Norway, only small minke whales are killed, which makes it easier to kill them quickly, and they use penthrite grenades which kill very quickly with a shock wave which tends to destroy the nervous system and kill instantly. My source in fact states that even whales which do not appear to have died instantly are in fact unconscious or dead and simply exhibit post-mortem movements. And of course whenever an animal is killed there is blood, but in a slaughterhouse it all goes down a drain and no one sees it.
My opponent states that the whaling industry is uneconomical, but the past 2 years have been very successful with increased catches and increased demand.
 https://vimeo.com... (18:00)
You say that whaling mostly benefits small town fishermen, because the cod have all gone during the spring and summer. Although cod are a significant part of Norway's fishing business, they aren't the only type of fish that can be hunted. There are many types of fish that can be hunted during the winter and fall seasons, such as the angler, which is admittedly less popular yet still beneficial.
Whale meat isn't necessary, nor is it bought often. Most of it goes to waste, or has trouble getting in supermarkets, as stated here:
Simply because the demand has increased, doesn't mean that it is successful.
If the minke whales are small, as soon as they are hit directly, they will die faster. But the smaller they are, the harder the target they are. And even if 80% die instantly, that's not all of them. That doesn't guarantee a completely smooth death for all whales. Their deaths may be fast, but the chase is still exhausting for them. And what if they have offspring that need to be taken care of, or are not born yet? I know that it's fully grown minke whales that are caught, but certainly the younger ones certainly deserve to live more. Whales are known for their abilities as parents.
Once again, I will say that whale meat is not necessary. There are abundant fish year round, as well as other game. It's much easier for farmers to raise lambs or pigs, and have them breed, to get humans the necessary nutrients that they need.
I only bring up the blood to emphasize the point of how gruesome the killing can be (along with a number of other animals, depends on the slaughterhouse.).
Even if it is legal in Norway among other countries, it can encourage illegal whaling as well which can be very harmful.
My opponent's source for information on whale meat sales seems not to include the most recent data. The past two years have been a great success for the industry, with even the first acquisition of a new boat in many years.  My opponent states that the small size of minke whales makes them more difficult to hit, but the boats are quite small and usually approach the whale quite close before firing the gun. This is to make the chances of a quick death very high. Of course, my opponent is correct that not all deaths can be instant, but this is also the case for big game hunting, and even slaughterhouses. It is unfair to hold the whale hunt to a higher standard than other forms of meat production. My opponent is correct in that a high speed chase would be stressful to the whale, but this is not the case in the Norwegian hunt. The boats will approach whales by radar and sighting, usually slowly to avoid scaring it away, and fire at it when it surfaces. The Norwegian fishing boats used are usually incapable of high speed! My opponent brings up a valid point in that calves should stay with their mothers, but the boats try to only fire at a whale if it does not appear to be with a calf. Of course, such an unfortunate incident cannot be completely avoided, but the treatment of baby animals in slaughterhouses and factory farms is truly appalling and is much worse than the occasional death of a nursing mother whale. Whale meat is not necessary in Norway, but this can be said of almost any food in the developed world. Any food has a suitable substitute. It is up to the market to decide what meat will be sold and in what amount. My opponent made this point, but I encourage anyone to consider the fact that to replace a whale's meat, other animals will have to die. And many more of them. To obtain 2 or 2.5 metric tons of meat, is it more ethical to kill one whale or 30 pigs? 500 cod?
And lastly, while there are small illegal whaling operations, they mainly take place in Korea and the Philippines. There is currently no evidence of illegal whaling anywhere near Norway, I assume due to the existent supply of legal meat.
StormySkies forfeited this round.
paulbrevik forfeited this round.
StormySkies forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Because of Pro's gracious allowance for Con to abandon the debate, I'm nulling it rather than giving it to Con. Pro, for future reference, you have the BoP in a case like this. You not only have to argue against any negative case, you have to give a substantial affirmative case of your own, and what you did present I did not find compelling in that regard. But, of course, the debate was truncated, and I'm not going to hold that truncation against you--hence, a nulled vote. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.