Faroese Whale Hunt - The Bad-Ass Shepherd - Case Study Example

Case Study Analysis: ‘Faroese Whale Hunt – The Bad-Ass Shepherd’ Name Course Tutor’s Name Date: Introduction In Faroese Islands, residents are legally allowed to hunt pilot whales in what is known as the annual Grindadràp. According to McGwin (2014), residents of Faroe Islands drive the pilot whales to shallow waters using boats, and from there, they stab and kill the animals for meat. In 2013 alone, 2,000 such animals were killed. As would be expected, the annual killing draws sharp reactions from environmentalists, conservationists and general animal lovers who feel that Faroe Islands does not have the right to go on a whale killing spree as they do each year. One such environmental group is the Sea Shepherd, which intends to stop the annual hunting through sea, air and land tactics. Their attempt to stop the annual hunting will no doubt create a problem because the local people who support the activity are backed by legal provisions, which allow them to hunt down the giant whales. Additionally, the annual Grindadràp is a cultural event in the islands which started as far back as 1,200 years ago (McGwin 2014). Stakeholders that influence the issue include the Faroese government, the local population who perceive the annual whaling activities as a cultural relic as well as a source of food, and activists who oppose the whaling tradition. The problem The problem of advocacy and activism against killing of pilot whales in Faroe Islands arguably stems from the fact that those driving the advocacy campaign are ‘outsiders’. In the case study, Sea Shepherd is the main advocacy society pushing for the locals to stop killing pilot whales. Notably, while Sea Shepherd is a renowned society that protects marine life all over the world, it is possible that Faroe Islands residents perceive the group’s activism as calculated cultural imperialism. The foregoing is probably the case because Sea Shepherd is based in the US. Even from the case study, activists, especially those who have signed up to disrupt this year’s (2014) event, are drawn from 27 countries. From an advocacy perspective, the Sea Shepherd has a hard time getting support from the local Faroese community, Faroese leaders, and even the International Whaling Commission (IWC), which categorises the pilot whales as ‘small cetaceans’ and therefore refuses to regulate their whaling (Fielding 2010, 430). Advocacy specifically faces challenges in Faroe Islands because the local community and the government support whaling not only for food-related reasons, but also for commercial reasons. Whale meat and blubber is rated among the major exports from the Faroese Islands (Fielding 2010, 431). Ideally, advocacy should contain organised efforts and actions that seek to highlight issues that are either ignored or submerged, with the intention of influencing attitudes (Tadros 2006, 12). When attitudes are affected, it then becomes easier to create public policies and enact laws that attain an ideal society as advocated by activists (Cohen, De la Vega and Watson 2001, 8). Could it therefore be that advocacy is failing to work because the local population perceives it as a ‘them against us’ kind of a thing? If the foregoing is the case, what can be done to convince more Faroese residents to join the activism against whaling? Who are the best advocacy ambassadors for the ant-whaling campaigns in Faroe Islands? When is the best time to start the activism? – i.e. should activists wait for Faroe Islands residents to ‘warm up’ for the annual Grindadràp just for them to start the protests, or is awareness creation needed to dissuade residents from the practice? How best should advocacy campaigns be carried out? Apart from the risk of over-extraction of pilot whales in the Faroe Islands, critics have argued that the animals suffer the worst form of cruelty as the hunters sever their carotid arteries and spinal cord using hooks and knives. It has also been noted that pilot whales are terrified (including those that evade the ordeal) since they are forced to frantically swim in bloodied water. But perhaps more relevant to the local population is that pilot whales have been found to have significant amounts of methyl mercury (MeHg) in the liver, kidneys and blubber. Moreover, the chief medical officer in the Faroese Islands (cited by Duignan 2010) had in 2008 declared that no part of the pilot whale was safe for human consumption. If the pilot whales’ meat and blubber risked human health when consumed, advocacy campaigners can use this cause to convince Faroese people to stop the practice; ideally, they should stop moralising the issue and strategise their campaigns in a manner that focuses on reducing the demand for pilot whales’ meat and blubber. Analysis From an environmental humanities perspective, activists agree that pilot whales are not at the risk of extinction. However, it is concerning that Grindadràp happens during the months when pilot whales are breeding. The hunting therefore jeopardises future generations of whales, especially because the hunters usually wipe out an entire family of pilot whales (Duignan 2010). Prolonged extraction of breeding whales and entire family lines may therefore lead to extinction of the targeted whales. Political factors: Activists need to understand the absence of political goodwill by the Faroese government and other environmental bodies such as IWC. Economic factors: Grindadràp’s catch is shared among members of the community where the catch was made, and as Fielding (2010, 431) notes, some people choose to sell their share. The economic gain however is not as large, only that those who benefit from the meat and blubber save the monies they would have used to purchase alternatives meat. Arguably, there is no economic motivation as to why the Faroese continue hunting the pilot whales. Social factors: A host of social factors affect and will continue to affect pilot whale hunting in the future. The most notable one in the case study is that Grindadràp is considered a cultural event by the Faroese. Unless the communities find a very convincing reason to stop it, they will most likely continue using the hunting as an event that is unique to Faroe Islands. A recent societal factor noted by Fielding (2010, 433) is that women of child bearing age are advised to avoid eating pilot whale meat or blubber since they contain MeHg. In the case study, it is indicated that Sea Shepherd has claimed that some locals support their advocacy campaigns, and such support from the locals could eventually change the perceptions that local communities have. Technological factors: Fielding (2010, 432) notes that before the 1980s, not much was known about the Grindadràp. With developments in technology and especially in news gathering and broadcasting, activists can now document and publish the Grindadràp as it happens and therefore expose the cruelty to the masses, which can the lobby the government in Faroe Islands to regulate the annual event. As indicated elsewhere in this paper however, Grindadràp is a cultural event in Faroe Islands, and unless the initiative to stop it is driven by people inside the community, chances of outsiders advocating any meaningful change are low. Perhaps activists need to start lobbying by highlighting the benefits of avoiding pilot whales’ meat and blubber using the available technological tools. Environmental humanities perspectives underscore the importance of analysing an environmental dilemma and finding a solution to it. As Fielding (2010, 437) notes, perhaps the health implications of consuming pilot whale products will succeed in dissuading the Faroese from hunting the animals any further. Recommendations Research: Advocacy groups like Sea Shepherd will most likely succeed in convincing the Faroese if they (the advocacy group members) research and understand the Faroese people, their values and their political, cultural, and legal environment. Additionally, the advocacy groups need to research the pilot whale hunting activity and identify more practical ways through which they can convince the people of Faroese Islands to stop it. Responses in the case study reveal that any arguments about the inhumane nature of hunting pilot whales are countered by equally convincing arguments. For example, one response argues that killing the whales is not any different from killing cows, goats, turkeys or chicken. If anything, the commentator argues, pilot whales are killed in seconds and thus do not suffer and are also killed in their natural habitat. Research will also help advocacy groups to target the right stakeholders with the right messages. For example, appealing to the Faroese government need a different strategy as opposed to appealing to the public sensitivities. Objectives: The advocacy groups should set the main objective as stopping the hunting of breeding pilot whales. Arguably, the moral responsibility of advocacy groups should not only be concerned about the killing of the animals, but should also show concern, first and foremost to the health implication of eating pilot whale meat and blubber that has been confirmed to contain methyl mercury. Planning and executing: The plan should take into consideration all stakeholders that need lobbying, the messages to be communicated and how to communicate such messages in order to ensure maximum efficacy. If messages are packaged as if to castigate the Faroese for what they consider as part of their cultural relic, it is likely that the advocacy groups will not be able to convince the communities. The execution stage needs to consider that community support is the greatest asset that advocacy groups can have. As indicated elsewhere in this paper, the Faroese government has not intervened in the issue before, and so has IWC. This means that the key people who need convincing are the pilot whale consuming Faroese people, who will lower their demand for meat and blubber and pressurise their government to put in the necessary legal restrictions. Evaluation: In this phase, the advocacy group will need to review its achievements – e.g. in attaining support from the Faroese population – against set objectives. References Cohen, David; De la Vega, Rosa, and Watson, Gabrielle. 2001. Advocacy for Social Justice: A Global Action and Reflection Guide. Kumarian Press Inc., Connecticut, USA. Duignan, Brian, 2010. “The Faroe Islands Whale Hunt.” April 26. Accessed September 4, 2014. http://advocacy.britannica.com/blog/advocacy/2010/04/the-faroe-Islandss-whale-hunt/ Fielding, Russell. 2010. “Environmental Change as a Threat to the Pilot Whale Hunt in the Faroe Islands.” Polar Research 29: 430-438. McGwin, Kevin. 2014. “Faroese Whale Hunt- The Bad-Ass Shepherd.” The Arctic Journal. July 28. Accessed September 4, 2014. http://www.thearcticjournal.com/culture/831/bad-ass-shepherd Tadros, Nader. 2006. Advocacy Concepts and Practices Handbook: A Practical Guide to Advocacy Groups. Virginia: People’s Advocacy. Read More