Subscription Center
Jul 28, 2009 05:55 PM | 12
The time is ripe for a masterful documentary that weaves a riveting yarn from the collapse of the world’s fisheries and Japan’s heartless pursuit of the ocean’s last great bounty from bluefin tuna to blue whales. The Cove is not that film.
At its core, The Cove is about the capture and slaughter of dolphins for meat in a heavily guarded inlet in Taiji, Japan, and the activists who seek to end this hunt. These activists include Richard O’Barry, the dolphin trainer who regrets his work on the TV series Flipper in the 1960s, and Paul Watson, the controversial captain of the Sea Shepherd who made Taiji’s dolphin hunt known through footage he posted on YouTube in 2003. All this is used, somehow, to also put the spotlight on the world’s declining fisheries. To director Louie Psihoyos, the lines are clear: you are either an “activist” or an “inactivist,” and this perspective (or lack thereof) becomes the film’s greatest flaw, reducing it from what could have been a powerful piece of undercover journalism to propaganda.
Dolphins and porpoises are two of the marine mammal groups in the order Cetacea, along with animals that the lay public calls whales. Dolphins are, in fact, more closely related to a beaked whale than a beaked whale is to a humpback. To add to the confusion, Pilot whales and killer whales are actually in the dolphin family.
Pro- and anti-whaling countries dispute whether the smaller cetaceans should be regulated under the International Whaling Commission. The IWC banned whaling in 1986 as many species reached bottom. The Japanese, however, have continued the practice through their dubious scientific whaling program known as the Institute of Cetacean Research.
Dolphins, as portrayed in The Cove, are the scraps left behind from the already overexploited marine ecosystem. The Japanese harvest an estimated 23,000 dolphins each year, but according to the filmmakers, no one in Japan really wants to eat dolphin meat. Consequently, it is sometimes falsely labeled and sold as whale, which is more palatable to the Japanese.
The film goes further to indict the dolphin hunt in Taiji, revealing how the Japanese government, conspiring with local goons, is suppressing information on dangerously high mercury levels in coastal dolphins that were potentially going to end up in obligatory school lunches. Finally, Japan’s dolphin meat industry only exists as a byproduct of the much more lucrative live dolphin trade for marine amusement parks around the world.
Much of this is old news, but it nevertheless remains shocking to see it all on film. Psihoyos does an admirable job bringing the science to life with on-screen DNA tests, mercury analyses, infrared cameras, hydrophones, and even a reference to a 2006 Science paper. To be sure, the filmmaker also scores some journalistic coups (and a few potshots) against the hypocrisy of the highly secretive Japanese whaling industry and Japan’s back-scratching of Caribbean nations on the IWC.
But Psihoyos never distinguishes the pragmatic questions about creating a sustainable and transparent whaling industry from the ethical question that colors his outlook: Should humans kill marine mammals for food?
Since he has already decided the practice is barbaric, science and sustainability are mere window dressings. One key piece of data that he manages to skim over is that some species of whales, such as the Minke, are no longer threatened as they were in the 1980s. Yet, rather than establish a modest, sustainable quota, a blanket ban has remained in place that will never appease traditional whaling nations. As for dolphins, in the 1970s, more than 100,000 were accidentally netted by fisherman each year, but that number has since been reduced to a few thousand with new gear. Today, according to the IUCN Red List, the striped, bottlenose, and Risso’s dolphins hunted in Taiji are all considered species of “Least Concern.”
Indeed, many conservationists – none of whom were interviewed in the film – think that sustainable use of wildlife, rather than an outright ban, is the only way to guarantee the survival of species and the preservation of ecosystems. I, for one, would rather see a temporary moratorium on the bluefin tuna fishery and tougher restrictions placed on rampant shark-finning, than spend my limited time worrying about Taiji’s dolphin industry. A more interesting film would ask what political forces have kept the current international ban on whaling – and the United States’ own Marine Mammal Protection Act – in place, while allowing the fish that feed the Earth to rapidly decline to practical oblivion.
Image of dolphin courtesy m-louis via Flickr
More News Blog: Next: Michigan doctors try transparency when dealing with malpractice Previous: Little money left to power down nuclear reactors
See what we're tweeting about
FlyingTrilobite Picture it #topoli: @iamdavidmiller and @oliviachow walking in slo-mo toward City Hall with The Chemical Brothers' "Galvanize" playing.
BoraZ Why a Science Experiment Gone Bad Doesn't Make Me a Criminal http://t.co/1jWbYNgtqw BoraZ RT @jayrosen_nyu: Public television’s attempts to placate David Koch. http://t.co/Bpn8E6sH1W A devastating account ...
Deadline: Jul 15 2013
Reward: $5,000 USD
SciBX: Science-Business eXchange, a joint publication from the makers
Deadline: Jul 25 2013
Reward: Varies
This challenge provides an opportunity for Solvers to build a web-based or mobile “app” to explore data relationships in scholarly conte
Powered By: 
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
12 Comments
Add CommentUsually, one tries to pick a film reviewer who does not have a hobby horse to ride. It appears that the reviewer picked himself here, underscoring why better edited media have this guideline. This review says far to little about the film, and far to much about another film the reviewer wishes were made. Is it not obvious that a polemic against overfishing writ large along with prescriptions to right this tragedy of the commons would make an overly broad and boring film? I am forced to wonder whether the dolphins might be of greater intelligence than 99.9% of bloggers, this one included. And I am embarrassed that we share the same first name.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am SHOCKED this article is on the Scientific American website. The writer of this article says "much of this is old news", but to whom? Maybe "old news" to the educated writer of this article, but not to the whole of the Japanese people who actually were being sold dolphin meat without their knowledge. It's not old news to the millions of people who will see The Cove this summer.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn fact the writer has missed the point of the film entirely. Dolphins are AWARE. they develop family relationships, display emotion and use intelligence that we do not see in fish. They are mammals....AND they are SMART. The fact humans are smarter and use their intelligence to exploit dolphins' weaknesses is displayed in a barbaric hunt that is sickening to watch. When the writer of this article declares that the dolphins killed in Taiji are "of least concern" he speaks only for the view of the IUCN. Really, "of least concern?"... by what standard? Not only will dozens of dolphins get shipped to a life of misery in aquariums around the world, but people will get sick from eating the meat, contaminated with Mercury (thank you coal power).
I am further dismayed that in the same breath of denouncing this video as "propaganda" (never mind it shows actual footage that speaks for itself) the writer feels efforts to protect other marine species are more important. Buddy, its an ecosystem. You have to protect it all. We deplore shark finning, derelict fishing gear, marine plastics, unsustainable quotas....but no way....no how...are we turning our backs on dolphins. It's naive in the least, and not at all based in scientific fact, to look at the recovery of one species over the short term and declare that the killings may once again commence. The entire marine ecosystem is in decline. You should not get to pick and choose which species you care for more. We have to care for them all.
I'd love to know which "conservationists" think the Taiji dolphin hunt is a good idea. Sustainable use of wildlife? Do we answer that question before or after children are born defected from Mercury contamination?
The Cove is a brave film. It's a quest to stop a hunt that makes the human race look like a bunch of savages for their "use" of wildlife. It makes one think about the role humans play on this planet and the power we lord over the other inhabitants of this earth. But humans also have the power to correct mistakes. We see this power in Ric O'Barry which makes for an amazing and inspiring story. AND that IS the point. We can stop what is wrong.
Brendan, it's unfortunate that this documentary was not about what you wanted it to be. Did you tell the film-makers before they made it or did you just expect them to read your mind? And considering all you contributed to the project it must be maddening that your message did not seem to shine through.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"But Psihoyos never distinguishes the pragmatic questions about creating a sustainable and transparent whaling industry from the ethical question that colors his outlook: Should humans kill marine mammals for food?"
Statements like that are what give scientists a bad name. It is why we are depicted as lunatics who are so focused on the "subject" that we forget our humanity. Should we uncolour our outlook about sustainable consumption of chimpanzees, orang-utans and gorillas while we are at it?
"One key piece of data that he manages to skim over is that some species of whales, such as the Minke, are no longer threatened as they were in the 1980s."
Are numbers the only factor in determining whether or not it is ok to eat something? Keep in mind that there are 6.5+ billion of us. We certainly aren't endangered either. I know that sounds crazy but step back from the ethical issue and look at it pragmatically. Eating people would not only feed large numbers of other, more fortunate people but would simultaneously reduce the number of mouths that need to be fed.
"I, for one, would rather see a temporary moratorium on the bluefin tuna fishery and tougher restrictions placed on rampant shark-finning, than spend my limited time worrying about Taiji's dolphin industry."
I agree that over fishing is a problem but how does that make it ok to kill whales? I don't get the logic there. In my mind the best solution to bad management is not to start managing something else badly, but learning ones limitations and addressing those. And why is it so hard to consider that some animals simply should not be eaten? Or, do human beings and human beings alone deserve to live free and unmolested by humanity? Maybe it's time to start thinking ethically about the other inhabitants of the planet and truly pragmatically about our role and our future here.
The other comments have already poked plenty of holes in this article's logic. Rather than poking another, I'd instead like to nominate the author for tomorrow's lunch.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The fact humans are smarter..."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is not a fact, and may actually be false.
Living in water, with no hands, dolphins can not discover fire, nor can they make flint tools or paper. This makes it practically impossible for dolphins to develop any kind of technology, even if they are as intelligent as we are.
it seems that the blogger is a bit biased.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisKilling self-aware, intelligent, non-aggressive and defenseless beings is not justifiable, regardless of their perceived level of intelligence. Dolphins are considered at least as intelligent, social, and creative as an average 5 year old child (and as time goes by, and we find new ways of testing them, that number is rising). Is it acceptable to kill humans under 5 years old? They'd make great sushi too. Such tender meat. Didn't think so. Goes for whales, great apes, etc etc...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisKilling begets killing. When it's life & death we're talking about, it's only a matter of time before capable people are sufficiently motivated to level the playing field on the Dolphins behalf. For every guy with a meathook and a net willing to kill a species he knows or cares little about, I'll bet I can find ten who wouldn't hesitate to put a round through that guys head. Keep in mind, conservationists are closely tied in with gun nuts, and a lot of us are ex-military. We've justified the taking of human life before, and we'll do it again.
This is bound to worsen until it is nipped in the bud.
I want to second that emotion...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBrendan is payed by the dolphin industry. Either that or he is braindead.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBrendan seriously needs to evaluate his perspective. The posting by robert schmidt was right on, as were those by brendan(no relation) and kaybythebay. I hope SA will also do some evaluating and find a critic that 1) Focuses on the movie/subject, 2) Does not offer undocumented evidence of his own and 3) Understands that the rest of the world may not have heard about everything he has. It seems rather condescending.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the dolphins should not be killed because they are intelligent, how stupid should an animal be to be killed? did US nuke Japanese and not Germans cause Japanese were colored and stupid? I think the "cute and intelligent" logic is as ridiculous as my immediately preceding sentence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYour "immediately preceding sentence" is not wrong, it is historically true. At the time, the prevalent racist view was that the Germans were people just like us american, while the japanese where sub-human aliens unworthy of any consideration. This thinking led to the 1945 firebombing of Tokyo, the 1945 nuclear-bombing of Hiroshima, the 1945 nuclear-bombing of Nagasaki. Those were crimes of war. Those were crimes against humanity. Those crimes still lives in infamy, and are indelible scars defacing US history.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this