2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Conference Paper Adaptive Management of Marine Mammals: Accentuating the Positive(1995) Freeman, Milton M. R.From introduction: "The recent history of marine mammal management includes examples where conflict rather than cooperation characterizes the discourse. One cause of the conflict appears to be the tendency toward globalizing (or progressively de-localizing) the management regimes, with a result that many actors peripheral to resource users' concerns come to play a role in management decision-making. This has the result of greatly increasing the politicization of the management process without increasing the sustainability of the resource user - resource stock interdependency that has come to be seen as an important conservation principle. "Today it is increasingly recognized that community-based fishery and wildlife users in many areas of the world have developed systems of using these local resources on a sustainable basis (e.g. NRC 1986; Berkes et al. 1989; Ostrom 1990; Ruddle and Johannes 1990). In many cases this sustainable use takes place despite the introduction of, e.g., modern technology and the community's commercial integration with the world economy (e.g. Dyer and McGoodwin 1994). "This paper will examine the management and use of certain marine mammals in the coastal zone or near shore areas in the northern regions, where for many years the traditional use and commercial trade of marine mammals has sustained the health and vitality of both aboriginal and non-aboriginal communities and their distinctive cultures. In these regions there exist successful management and conservation programs operating with and without government (or other outside) involvement. "In the discussion that follows, two intergovernmental marine mammal management regimes will be briefly described and their performance analyzed. These two management bodies are the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and the International Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears (abbreviated to the Polar Bear Agreement, or PBA). "In marked contrast to the highly polarized and conflict generating nature of debates that characterizes the IWC management style, the PBA operates with a high degree of consensus and an almost total absence of conflict between governments and user groups. One very important difference between these two management regimes is the different understanding of the role of people in wildlife and fisheries management, in which the reactionary position exemplifying the whaling regime is strongly contrasted with the progressive view represented in the polar bear regime."Conference Paper How Environmentally-Friendly is Whaling: An Ecological Perspective(1992) Freeman, Milton M. R."Much of international debate about management objectives and appropriate utilization of both whale and elephant populations centres on whether it is appropriate to regard these stocks as being essentially the same or fundamentally different from other biotic or mammalian resource stocks. Increasingly it appears that sectors of western society imbue both whales and elephants (and certain other selected species, e.g. see Kellert 1986) with a special status that requires that they be treated fundamentally differently from other species for management and conservation purposes. "The special status accorded whales and elephants comes in part from their biological characteristics, though very often these may be imputed or imagined biological characteristics rather than scientifically established ones. For example, the question of 'intelligence,' or communication abilities, or behavioral or social characteristics of these particular animals are areas where sentimentality, imagination, extreme anthropomorphization, or mere wishful thinking frequently overtakes the available scientific evidence. Unfortunately it is not only non-scientists who suffer lapses of critical thinking in regard to these matters (though often these scientists are non-specialists in the areas of science they uncritically embrace). "It is easy to be misled in these matters, as government officials, public figures, the media and various national and international organizations promote the impression that whales and elephants are highly intelligent, seriously endangered and subject to needless and irresponsible slaughter and consequently in urgent need of total protection. "Many scientists associate themselves with these 'environmental' campaigns. Championing a popular 'green' cause certainly can provide a welcome change from labouring in relative obscurity, as public advocacy may result in invitations to speak and be consulted, the promise of travel, and, perhaps, enhanced access to research funds."