New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Save the Whales--by Hunting Them?

A new proposal would limit whaling, by permitting small amounts of it. David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Whaling has been banned since 1986. And yet the actual number of whales killed each year has been increasing steadily. Japan, Iceland, Norway and indigenous groups hunted and

killed at least 17,000 whales over the last decade.  

[audio clip of minke whale song]


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


That's the song of an Atlantic

minke whale —and minkes are often the type of whale in the cross-hairs of Japanese and Scandinavian harpoon ships. Whale meat isn't confined to those countries; a sample showed up in a California sushi restaurant in March.  

But there’s an effort to hold back the rising tide of whaling. A group of countries, including the U.S., has

proposed permitting a limited amount of whaling . This would allow for the return of the commercial whaling that Ronald Reagan led the charge to ban. In exchange, whaling countries would accept quotas for the number of whales they could kill . The proposal will be voted on at the end of June.  

Unfortunately, those quotas over the next decade would be exactly the same as the number of

whales hunted and killed today for so-called "scientific purposes ." So the plan might slow the steady creep up in whaling. But it wouldn't halt, or even curtail, the current hunt. 

—David Biello

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe