Australia is in fast danger of not seeing the forest for the whales – oh sorry the fish for the whales.

Every now and then an issue becomes so acceptable in the mainstream that anybody can talk about it without upsetting anyone. A good example is how every corporate lawyer in between shredding documents for cigarette companies and screwing bushfire victims out of their insurance claims feels comfortable enough to bang on about human rights.

 

Whales are for the environment as human rights are for lawyers. The issue has crossed political divides now for many years (see former Coalition environment minister Ian Campbell now acting as legal adviser to the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society) and features prominently in the pages of most newspapers in the country, including almost weekly in the Sunday Daily Telegraph.

 

The reality is we like a whale much more than almost any other animal except for maybe a bushfire-ravaged koala. To Australians a whale is one sexy piece of megafauna and defending its honour has become a national past time since we stopped killing them in 1978.

 

It also feels like there's an undercurrent air of vague racism throughout the issue. It often feels as though the whaling battle is the replacement for the sea battle for the Pacific over 60 years ago. Norway and Iceland have a similar whaling program but Australians don’t get stuck into them in the same way. At any rate, and more than anything, we like something to get self-righteous about in between Hey Hey controversies and drink-driving football coaches.

 

This is not to dismiss the concerns about whaling. Greenlines is just taking exception to the amount of time and energy spent on the issue, including the annual pilgrimage to the International Whaling Commission by the federal environment minister (of both parties) to thump on a desk and look angry.

 

On Friday, Fisheries Minister Tony Burke released the Fishery Status Report 2008 to no media coverage. One of the findings seized upon by the Greens, with due reason, was the results from the Southern Bluefin Tuna fishery, which stretches through Victoria, Tasmanian and South Australia.

 

Bluefin Tuna is not the only fish found to be in trouble in Friday’s report (21 are determined to be overfished or subject to overfishing) but it’s a striking example.

 

Bluefin Tuna is fast becoming the sexist megafauna battle for the new millennium. The ban on fishing and/or trading of the Atlantic Bluefin is now being considered by a number of major European countries and the even the US.

 

The Southern Bluefin is probably in worse shape than its northern brother. In 2005 an Environment Department scientific committee found it should be listed as an endangered species.

 

Then environment minister Ian Campbell (that’s right the aforementioned Coalition minister now on the Sea Shepherd advisory board) overturned the decision. Campbell's decisions was taken to court by green groups, but was thrown out.

 

There has now been a second application for the Southern Bluefin to be assessed for an endangered listing and Environment Minister Peter Garrett will have to make a decision about its status later this year. If he lists it as endangered there will be major implications for the fishing industry, including a potential ban (although that is unlikely).

 

Friday’s report contains some damning statements about the status of the Bluefin fishing in Australia.

 

It finds:

 

— The allowable Australian catch of Southern Bluefin in its fishery has not changed for 20 years despite "serious declines" in numbers.

 

— The Bluefin is a high-value, high-profit fishery, but a proportion of that is from overfishing. The report states, ‘‘consequently, the current level of profits may not be sustainable over the longer term’’.

 

— Southern Bluefin is considered to be overfished and subject to overfishing and the amount of fish taken from the sea should be cut to allow numbers to recover.

 

One CSIRO scientist told Greenlines many months ago the last scientific stock assessment found Southern Bluefin numbers are 6-14 per cent of 1950 levels, likely to be below 10 per cent.

 

The levels of fishing in the Australian Bluefin fishery are set by the Government, but usually taken from the recommendations of the Commission for the Convention of Southern Bluefin Tuna - a multilateral body including Australia, New Zealand and Japan.

 

CSIRO and the Fisheries Department have finished a recent assessment of stock numbers for the Commission, which will be released publicly at the annual meeting later this month. It is not likely to be positive.

 

That meeting will also determine if cuts to fishing numbers should be made. Whether they propose the kind of cuts comparable to the last 60 odd years of decimation to stock numbers remains to be seen. But the question should be asked… will Australia vehemently defend the Bluefin Tuna as it does whales at the International Whaling Commission?

 

In short, probably no. The Southern Bluefin Tuna has had a massive collapse in numbers in 60 years. Is currently overfished in a managed Australian fishery. It earns the local fishing industry hundreds of millions. And the Australia Government sanctions it.

 

And the kicker? Most of what we catch is exported to Japan for high-grade sushi.

 

Maybe it’s time we give up some of that moral high ground on whaling and find some perspective. A whale may be a mammal - but there are plenty more fish in the sea.