And so to Monaco - ACCOBAMS COP

It is wet in Monaco. Not as wet as in the UK (which is once again ‘enjoying’ some flooding) but the day is overcast here and water is being squeezed in a persistent drizzle from the low grey clouds overhead.

I am attending the sixth meeting of the Conference of Parties to ACCOBAMS (the agreement for cetaceans in the Mediterranean, Black Sea and adjacent Atlantic area) and delegates from countries that are parties to the agreement and various organisations are gathered to take part in the meeting and also in the associated celebrations for this is the twentieth anniversary of the conclusion of the agreement.  

The meeting begins with the arrival of his Serene Highness Prince Albert II of Monaco. The congregation stands as he arrives accompanied by his security and a small entourage.

The Prince flanked by the Executive Secretaries of ACCOBAMS to the left
and CMS to the right.  

First we are addressed by the lead delegate from Morocco (as head of the ACCOBAMS Bureau). She explains that the presence of his Serene Highness gives a ‘higher and deeper meaning’ and she thanks the Prince for his support for the meeting and the agreement. Cetaceans, she notes, are exposed to an increasing anthropogenic pressure. She thanks the ACCOBAMS bureau, Executive Secretary, Scientific Committee and others for their work. She notes that the Agreement brings together the Northern and Southern countries. Funding has been found for the [big] survey; submarine noise is a nuisance and causes mass strandings this needs to be addressed and she notes significant progress on administrative matters. She also describes ongoing work in her own country and then gives everyone good wishes for the meeting.

Bradnee Chambers, the Executive Secretary for the Convention for the Conservation of Migratory Species comes to the podium next. He notes the twenty year anniversary and that this is a pivotal time for many listed species. The range of threats that these animals have to struggle with is illustrated in the documents in front of this meeting.  Threats are multiple, cumulative and simultaneous. Threats such as pollution alter the lives of species in every sea… tackling such threats require global responses. He underlines the importance of multilateral environmental agreements and that they are ‘the life blood of species conservation’.

He adds that as the world’s population continues to grow, so our impacts will continue to grow and calls for us to become proactive and refers to the UN sustainable development goals. He points to the joint noise working group between ACCOBAMS and ASCOBANS as an example of good practice.

He concludes by acknowledging the generous support of the Principality of Monaco for the agreement and its work.

Madam Florence Descroix-Comanducci (the Executive Secretary of the ACCOBAMS agreement) speaks next, thanking the Prince for joining the meeting and notes that the meeting coincides with the 20th anniversary; most parties are present and also organisations and partners to the agreement. Today we are at a U-turn; we are becoming adults because we are twenty years old; at the outset we thought we would have all the tools that we needed and much work has been carried out on draft resolutions (in ‘record number’) in front of us. The ACCOBAMS survey initiative – costing several 

million and planned for ten years – is now going forward. In all we have a heavy schedule in front of us. She too acknowledges twenty years of support from the principality and its princes, first Prince Renier and now you (and she turns to the Prince). She presents him with a piece of art to commemorate this contribution.

Presentation to the Prince

The Prince next comes to the microphone. He is happy to welcome us here for the sixth meeting of parties and the 20^th anniversary of the agreement. He notes the common goal of preserving biodiversity between his government and ACCOBAMS. This topic is important for him and for his foundation. We need to know marine biodiversity because we can only protect what we know well. He has made a contribution of 100,000 US dollars to the ACCOBAMS survey project.

Sometimes we see threats to cetaceans in the media – but sometimes they are hidden like poorly organised whale watching and noises – so we need to restrain activities for longer term gain. We need to convert data into credible measures. This is the task that ACCOBAMS tackles and he notes how difficult it is to address fisheries matters in particular. Noise in a worrying problem – sometime from oil and gas and sometimes from military activities – this presents the animals from knowing where they are going.

ACCOBAMS includes diverse territories and this is the wealth of this agreement. ACCOBAMS trainings are essential tools; beyond its statutory area ACCOBAMS is an ambassador, an example for other areas and I congratulate the secretariat for the quality of its work. Action is urgently needed; let’s work together. [Warm applause.]

A video follows – whales and dolphins calls fill the room and images of animals, research and educational activities. 

A coffee-break is followed by organisational matters, including voting rights. The Chair of the meeting now becomes France. He thanks everyone for the honour. We proceed by approving the agenda and then through other organisational matters, including the document that establishes the Secretariat which is in part supplied by Monaco

Lunch dawns…. It is sumptuous but, before anyone can attempt a siesta, we are back to the meeting room where various international organisations are competing for who has been around the longest (and also telling us what they have been doing and encouraging cooperation). The IWC wins with 70 years (recently celebrated) and Barcelona Convention comes second with 40 years. The IWC representatives adds that he too has recently had his birthday (he is younger than the IWC but older than the Barcelona convention).

IWC notes a range of common interests including marine debris and entanglement.   

Other international organisations follow and then the first NGO (non-governmental organisation) speaks – it is Aimee Leslie for WWF. She eloquently wishes the meeting well and puts emphasis on this issue of bycatch.

Bradnee Chambers speaks next for CMS and notes that his organisation has its meeting of the parties where Noise Guidelines will be put in front of the parties, among many other issues. He passes the microphone to Heidi to speak to areas of common interests – which she does, noting a resolution on live captures and its link to the discussion at CITES on black sea bottlenose dolphins; she also notes the CMS culture resolution – which she says was ‘ground-breaking’ [I agree] and the addition of Cuvier’s beaked whale in the Mediterranean to the CMS appendices. She details other issues.

Please note that here - as in other reporting from other meetings - I am just sampling what is said and paraphrasing and trying to capture the gist of some of the interventions. If I make mistakes, please let me know.

France: man-made noise, certification of whale watching, bycatch and strandings will be their priorities and they have given 400, 000 euros the Mediterranean survey project.

Lebanon speaks to work in his country, including some research on bottlenose dolphins. He is looking for tissue samples from other countries. Cetology is also taught in two French-speaking Lebanese universities. They need someone to show them how to do photo-iD work and they hope to establish a strandings network.

Egypt has a new national team of young observers and this has already raised a lot of interest.

Tunisia notes cetaceans are protected in her waters and there are a number of project running, including a monitoring network.

Algeria has been working for many years towards the conservation of cetaceans. One of Algeria’s universities has a department looking at cetacean issues and looking forward to a thriving ongoing collaboration.

Morocco lists work on going in this country including strandings work which is leading to databases being updated.   

Italy states the full support of this country for the agreement and support for a full and permanent secretariat. They have donated to the basin-wide survey.

Egypt comes to the microphone again to say that dolphins seem to be coming closer to the shore and asks why this might be. Is this climate change, have we changed marine ‘land-marks’? Where species can be seen from one country to another within a few days, we may need to follow this.

Non-party range states are encouraged to speak and Israel thanks the secretariat and Monaco for their support over the last twenty years. He too mentions anthropogenic noise as an issue. His country brought new guidelines into play which helped cetaceans (and turtles). Efforts to remove bottom-trawling fishing is ongoing. Weather updates are often augmented with photos of dolphins. 

View from the back of the hall,

Next we hear the report of the ACCOBAMS Bureau and then the work of the Secretariat from 2014-2016.

The agreement has twenty members and ratification of its newly-defined area is in progress. The Executive Secretary goes on to list meetings held during this period, including one on climate change.

She continues by describing work on hotspots of noise and some other issues as shown in the slides below and notes ongoing collaborations with a range of other bodies (several of which are in the room).

At the end of the presentation from Florence, Egypt encourages ACCOBAMS to try to achieve a higher profile. Perhaps they need an ambassador and he likes the idea that cetaceans can be used as indicators of climate change. 

The issue of the CITES resolution on Black Sea bottlenose dolphins is touched on. The resolution called for DNA tracking of this sub-species in trade.

Finally, the Secretariat is thanked for all her work. 

The Credential Committee led by Anna of Croatia next tells us that 19 parties are present. 16 have credentials in order. 

Alison Wood of WDC and of Margherita Zanardelli of the Tethys Research Institute..

Aimee Leslie of WWF International (as the sign says).

We closed and make our way to a reception at the Royal Monaco yacht Club... as you do.

A Eulogy for Whale Poo at the IWC

Another short follow-up piece to the recent IWC meeting.

Which august international body celebrated its 70th birthday by paying special attention to faecal plumes? And what, you might ask, are these plumes?

more here on Huffington Post.

With thanks to Fabian Ritter for the use of his photos. 

IWC 66 The Big Bycatch Intervention

In the meeting of the IWC Conservation Committee which preceded the big Commission meeting itself (as reported here), I was privileged to deliver the 'bycatch intervention' based on Paper IWC/66/CC05. The paper was the result of some intensive activity in the few weeks leading up to the meeting in order to try to make the case for a new IWC work-stream on this very pressing issue.

Here is what I said:

"Thank you Chair. Before I introduce the paper CC05, I should explain its genesis, as also explained in footnote 1. The Conservation Committee planning meetings last year and this tasked me to work with others to develop suggestions for the [Conservation] Committee on advancing work to reduce cetacean bycatch.

As you can see, I was able to assemble an excellent and remarkable group of people (you will see their names at the top of the document) and over the last few months we have developed this paper. (Please also note that whilst I am speaking from the UK microphone this is not a UK document and my Commissioner will probably offer his own observations in due course.)

The document is intended to provide an overview of the topic to provide context – this is contained in its annex – and, as the last planning meeting requested, it makes some broad suggestions about how to take this issue forward.

                                                                               

Bycatch is an enormous conservation issue – enormous in terms of importance and scope - as you will see in the document we call it a ‘global crisis’ – in some cases it is driving populations towards extinction. Undoubtedly it is the most pressing conservation issue of our time for cetaceans. Hence we should undoubtedly now be trying to steer some energy and effort towards it.

Bycatch includes all entanglements in fishing gear and is an issue for both large and small cetaceans, and occurs throughout all the world’s oceans and rivers. It involves a wide variety of fishing operations from artisanal to very large-scale commercial operations.

Back in 2006, Professor Andy Read and colleagues provided the now famous global estimate for bycatch of cetaceans. They suggested that it was in the region of 308,000 animals per year.

Since then, there has been an increase in the amount of gear deployed globally and often with stronger equipment being used, increasing the potential for bycatch and subsequent mortality. Large cetaceans may be underrepresented in fisheries observer data - as they often do not remain with the gear or will carry it away with them, hence the estimate from Read and colleagues is now likely to be an underestimate of the real toll.

Animals which are captured in fishing gear but subsequently escape, often have scars on their bodies indicative of such events. Such matters have been most studied in the North America region – so we take some of our examples from there but this should not be taken to mean that we think that the issue was limited to this region - recent investigations documenting these scars on endangered North Atlantic right whales and humpback whales along the East Coast of the USA indicate that they regularly encounter and shed gear and that many more have been affected than have been reported entangled. Researchers have found that between 65-85% of the individuals within these populations bear scars from having encountered gear and that, on average, 12-16% of these populations exhibit new scars each year. These studies have also shown that there has been a significant increase in the rate of serious entanglements detected over the last 30 years in the Northeast Atlantic.

Again, these results indicate that bycatch is a more frequent occurrence than fisheries data indicate.

Generally, given the low rate at which these bycatch events have been reported (e.g. some  <10% in the case of carcass detection rates); the most effective management initiatives are likely to be those that focus on prevention. 

For some populations and species, the observed deaths and serious injuries caused by bycatch continue to exceed what are considered to be sustainable levels and bycatch is a particular conservation concern for some small cetacean populations and species. 

These include, of course, the vaquita, many river dolphin populations and others.

Given the large number of small cetacean species that are ‘data deficient’ according to the IUCN, there are also likely to be populations that are not well described that are also threatened by bycatch, especially as the world’s fishing fleets expand in some areas.

Bycatch is not just a conservation issue but a welfare matter too.

Chronic entanglement is regarded as one of the most severe forms of animal cruelty. Cetaceans as breath-holding animals will not experience a swift death if trapped underwater. Prolonged suffering can occur and in the case of the largest whales that swim away with netting and other fishing gear wrapped around them they can experience severe wounding and sometimes impaired feeding leading to severe emaciation or other health consequences that can eventually lead to death sometime later or which may affect the health and fecundity of the animal even after gear is removed. These effects often go undetected following release or escape from fishing gear and there is often uncertainty about the outcome because “survivors” are not necessarily re-sighted and deaths not necessarily observed.

Many studies on bycatch focus solely on quantifying mortality to understand the risk to population viability, however, the stress and suffering experienced by individual animals cannot be ignored. And the average time to death to death for an entangled, free-swimming North Atlantic right whales is 6 months.

We cannot ignore either the conservation or the welfare implications of this issue.

In his 2008 paper, ‘The Looming Crisis’, Professor Read stated that one of the areas most needed to address this issue globally is a system through which successful mitigation measures can be made available to a global audience. In our paper to you we echo this, and we propose that it is the ‘Transfer of expertise, technology and management measures’ that would be the primary focus for the contribution by the IWC.

It is perhaps, remarkably there is no global effort being made to address this matter. We have the opportunity; arguably we have the responsibility.

Finally, in section 3 of paper CC05 – we outline some options [for the IWC], including a ‘threats-based’ Conservation Management Plan addressing Bycatch Mitigation; The Establishment of a Bycatch Working Group of the Conservation Committee; the Development of the Bycatch Initiative following the Example of the Disentanglement Initiative, and the establishment of an expert panel.

If we move forward with a bycatch Conservation Management Plan – it would be the first threat-based CMP. Hitherto CMPs have focused on species and populations and many are likely to include bycatch. Perhaps the CMPs should maintain their taxonomic focus.  A working group of the Conservation Committee would not be difficult to establish and could follow the model already being effectively used for ship-strikes. The Disentanglement Initiative shows us how effective it can be to have the right person in the right place at the right time: and we should certainly take this into account (and there is of course a relationship between the Disentanglement work and the proposed bycatch mitigation initiative) – and I draw the meeting’s attention to the key elements identified as bullets in section 3.3 and, we also highlighted the idea of establishing an expert panel or group to advise the initiative.

Our intention here was not to be prescriptive but to try to help inform the view of the conservation committee by looking at the various mechanisms that might be used to develop a BYCATCH MITIGATION INITIATIVE. And I should stress that this is what we are talking about, not assessment of removals – this is already embedded in the work of the Scientific Committee – but ways to mitigate bycatch. So we should perhaps call this the bycatch mitigation initiative.

My working group went on discussing this matter after we filed the paper and key in our ongoing thinking are the expert panel and a bycatch initiative coordinator.  

And, of course, inherent in any effort made from the IWC is that this should work hand in hand with those other international organisations which also have complementary interests. A list is provided in CC05 and would include inter alia the Convention for the Conservation of Migratory Species and its cetacean-facing daughter agreements and FAO.

In closing this introduction Chairman, I note that this is certainly a multi-faceted issue – addressing it will not be easy - but there needs to be a beginning.

So, let us be bold and make a start to try to positively influence this very pressing matter now."

I am pleased to report that the Bycatch Initiative went on to win support in the Conservation Committee and then in the Commission meeting where there were also some donations made to support it and it is now open for further support. 

Tonya Wimmer at the IWC
Scientific Committee in May

The original 'heavy lifting' on paper CC05 was mainly done by Tonya Wimmer and I am very grateful to her and the other participants in the drafting group for their work. 

Potentially this is something both novel and very important which has now been initiated at the IWC and the tremendous support of WWF (who lobbied around the halls in support of it), HSI, WDC and other NGOs - as listed in the intervention made by Aimee Leslie (HERE) - should also be acknowledged and likewise the support from the IWC Scientific Committee.

Upwards and onwards!

Report from WWF for IWC 66
available HERE

IWC 66 Some More Images

The UK delegation to IWC 66. From the left (front row), Donna MacKay, Jamie Rendell, Nigel Gooding (Commissioner), Mark Simmonds, (back from the left), Cat Bell , Emma Rundell, Jenny Lonsdale

Presentation of the South Atlantic Whale Sanctuary Proposal

Michael Stachowitsch (third from left) chairing the 'welfare subcommittee'

One of the long tables of IWC66

Bruno Mainini (Chair of IWC 66) and Simon Brockington (IWC Executive Secretary)

Part of the presentation of the Scientific Committee report

The Commissioner for Monaco, Frederic Briand

Aimee Leslie of WWF and Kate O'Connell of AWI

The Argentinian delegation - Miguel Iniguez (left) and Juan Pablo Paniego

The Belguan Delegation: Els Vermulen, Stephanie Langerrockand Fabian Ritter 

All delegates were given water bottles with the IWC seventy anniversary logo
- here the water bottles of Australia.

Caro Cassani (left) of Foundation  Cethus and Astrid Fuchs of WDS
 in the NGO seats

View from the back

Intervention on interactions with other IGOs by Sarah Smith of the IWC Secretariat (on the big screen)

Hedrun Frisch Nwakanma of the
Convention for the Conservation of Migratory Species and ASCOBANS
(on the big screen)

Sidney Holt one of the original 'Gang of Three' -
the members of the first Scientific Committee of the IWC (Sidney is now 90)

The Commissioner of St Vincent with Kitty Block and
Claire Bass of HSI behind him.

Sharon Livermore of IFAW and DJ Shubert from the USA delegatino

Display for the South Atlantic Sanctuary.

A note on a wall for all Eurpeans (still including the UK)

DJ Shubert again and Jose Truda Palazzo of Uruguay

Mrs Jennifer Lonsdale OBE of the
UK delegation.

Bernard Unto and Kitty Block of HSI take tea.

IWC 66 Questions answered

Protest banners outside IWC66

Before the opening of IWC 66 I asked some questions about what was going to happen.

Here they are again – this time with the answers:

·  Will the commission accept the importance of whale poo to its deliberations and move to celebrate faecal plumes as the best thing ever:

• Yes...pretty much... by a revised and majority resolution the Commission has acknowledged the links between whales and ocean productivity and the roles that whale stocks play in climate change (stay tuned for more about this).

· What will we decide about special permit/scientific whaling;

• We heard that many did not like it and many others thought it was just fine but, by majority resolution, a new review structure was put in place (congratulations to Australia and New Zealand).

· Will the wifi hold up in the meeting halls to facilitate a paper-less meeting or will delegates be unable to update their Facebook status;

• The wifi was totally excellent – the sessions went too fast at times to find the damned papers but that was not the fault of the wifi – and Facebook pages were updated, along with blogs (thank you Secretariat).

· Will the Whatsapp app cause further devaluation  of the pound

• Whilst the Whatsapp app is much loved by some teams at the IWC to keep in touch, it is not responsible for the falling British pound (which was mentioned several times during the IWC meetings, as the IWC bank account is in the UK) – the reason for the falling pound is something known as Brexit;

· Will the lifts [in the meeting hotel] prove capable to the job and how many times will delegates with widely differing views be squashed together in a confined space and will this help build consensus;

• It is possible that the lifts might explain the disappearance of some delegations during the meeting. For example at one point one was out of action and maybe that is where the disappeared Croatian Commissioner still is. I am not aware of any consensus building achieved in the lifts but I am confident that the many small Slovenia cakes were helpful in this regard;

· Will there be anywhere sensible to find a quick lunch (actually as we have been here before, I am fairly certain – unless the IWC secretariat has set up a new catering venture – that the answer is no);

• Actually folks seemed to do OK – they even left a few small cake and some fruit on tables over lunch for the needy – which was kind;

· How will the proposal for a South Atlantic Sanctuary fare this time;

• Not well.

· Will anyone mention the ongoing whaling by Norway and Iceland;

• Yes – this was mentioned several times not only by the countries concerned with pride but in interventions by other countries and NGOs.

· Will the imperiled nature of the vaquita and the mauis dolphin get air time;

• Yes. mauis were mentioned and New Zealand gave a reply. More spectacular was the resolution which came in late and was still accepted, and then passed concerning the vaquita (well done Clare/EIA and all concerned).

· Will any nation walk out (we have not had a good walk-out for a few years and they always helped to provide some drama to the proceedings);

• There was a vague threat of something similar hanging in the breeze but no physical movement as such.

· Will any NGOs walk out and would anyone care if they did, or even miss them

• No one walked out but there was something close to a fight over the microphone between two NGO speakers. (This was just before one of them shouted at us all.) And I think that especially now that NGOs can speak to issues during the actual debate and made comments that were helpful and to the point in almost all cases – we would be missed;

· Will remaining NGOs successfully make relevant interventions on specific topics as they come up on the agenda;

• See above.

· Does anyone care about the hundreds of thousands of cetaceans being cruelly killed in fishing nets;

• Yes they do – a new work-steam was agreed on this and a coordinator appointed. (I will come back to this too}

· Does anyone care about all the stranded cetaceans;

• Yes they do – a new work-stream agreed and a coordinator is being sought.

· Does anyone care what the IWC Scientific Committee did over the last couple of years;

• Yes several of us do!

·  Has the UK Commissioner brought his meerkat;

• Yes, Nigel Gooding brought his growing family of little mascot meerkats and baby meerkat was briefly 'kidnapped' before being found in a bar in Piran early on Saturday morning.

· How many mentions of faecal plumes will there be

• Too many – stop going on about it – the resolution passed!

Questions that I should have asked but did not – with answers:

·        After its long absence from the IWC will Kenya – African champion of terrestrial conservation – return as a member of the like-minded or the pro-commercial whaling camp?

Kenya appeared to vote consistently with the pro-commercial whaling nations

·        Will the distinguished Commissioner from Luxembourg, Pierre Gallego, get the biggest laugh of the whole meeting?

·        Yes he will – see report from the last day.

Pierre of Luxembourg and his coffee

·        Will the distinguished alternate Commissioner for Austria – my buddy Michael Stachowitsch  – win the prestigious Hans and Lotte Hass Conservation award this year:

·        Yes he will – congratulations Michael.

·        Will the Executive Secretary of the IWC look tired but happy at the end of the meeting?

·        Yes.

And finally can I recommend any reading about some of the issues dealt with at IWC 66?

           

Yes I can see HERE.

More pictures and analysis later!

            

IWC 66 - The End. REV

The way forward is not coming forward.

This is the second half of the Friday report - the closing session of IWC 66.

On NEWREPA – it transpires we will have text from both New Zealand and Antigua and Barbuda

Any Laurensen, the Commissioner of New Zealand. says that they would like to add some words – the following like the rest of my reporting is not a quote -

In accordance with resolution 2014-5 – the commission considered {and she lists countries, including all the EU, the BAG and others -  majority of members noted with concern that Japan issued special permits before the Commission – considered that NEWREPA [the New Japanese scientific whaling programem in the Southern Ocean] is not for Scientific Research and requested that Japan ceased the programme.

Antigua and Barbuda said he was waiting for sweet music – I was waiting to be called in [we think he refers to some chimes that have been used to summon commissioners] – he thanks New Zealand and their side for understanding the need for balance. Antigua and Barbuda and Japan and others that opposed resolution 2014-5 state that it was non-legally binding and cannot be taken to alter the rights and obligations of contracting governments.  NEWREPA is entirely within the provisions of the ICRW and Article VIII. Japan has made sincere efforts to consult with the SC and contracting governments…. He has the full text and will submit it

We next review the summary statement made of the Commission’s work which will be issued on the website. [This is a table which identifies the main decisions and issues which the IWC issues at the closing of the meeting 

You can find the summary HERE with the other plenary documents.

Some words are added by the USA relating to the section on Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling. The Dominican Republic is not happy with this - but then is reassured -  and we move  reviewing the summary, passing through the reports of the Conservation and Scientific Committees and that text is Ok. [The donation from the Netherlands will be added.] We pass through "unintended anthropogenic impacts based on the reports from the SS and the CC. Bruno pauses for a moment. It is OK.

The IWC in the future is ….. no… Australia is seeking clarification. His understanding was that the ‘way forward’ paper was not coming forward at this time. Did I misunderstand?

Bruno says his understanding was to start the discussion. The current wording sounds like we adopted the proposal – there is some debate around what this language should say and it is concluded that this language will be worked on and added later.

Caterina Fortuna Chair of the Scientific Committee ,who has not said anything for a while, asks for the endorsement of Annex P to feature in this summary.

New Zealand would like to add some words to do with the 'Safety at Sea' issue and will come up with a proposal. This would not change what is there.

Japane says it has to see what would be proposed.

NZ says ‘Several member states reaffirmed the strength of existing legal frameworks for addressing safety at sea’. This is agreed.

Now - somewhat randomly - Belgium [in the form of the alternate Commissioner Fabian Ritter] now welcomes all to the 2015 IWC whale tie contest. [Is this still the report from IWC 66? Yes it is. Stay tuned!]

Then his partner-in-crime in this amusing interlude, the distinguished Commissioner of Luxembourg, 

Pierre Gallego, is given the microphone… he says,  as it is the first time that Luxembourg says something I would like to thank the hosts  – there is laughter and applause.

He explains that only ladies can vote in the tie contest and they will show us some pictures that they have gathered. He asks Simon if he can check that their credentials are correct and I believe that the Executive Secretary blushes.

Simon says please go ahead. The ties are shown on the screen. Then is voting and applause and Moronuki of Japan wins with his stunning tie which shows one whale swimming in the opposite direction to the others!

Two whale-themed ties shown on the big screen

The Commissioner for Luxembourg (left) waves the tie-prize in the air
watched by his legal adviser, Professor Chris Wold

We move to the issue of the new Chair of the Commission. Russel Smith, IWC Commissioner of the USA eloquently proposes Joji Morishita, the Commissioner of Japan.  

Chair Bruno asks is he is willing and he is.

Jogi  Morshita says thank you. It will be difficult to follow you. I will expect Commissioners to be in the meeting room on time.

[Applause.]

Bruno – we also need a new Vice Chair.

The Slovenian Commissioner is nominated by Japan

He is willing and there is more applause.

Australia congratulates Commissioner Morishita and Andrej of Slovenia. He says that he appreciates Joji’s long association with the Commission. To Bruno he says, we would also like to thank you for your excellent chairing – we are very grateful to you.

Dr Nick Gales, Commissioner for Asutralia

Mexico says he would like to echo Australia’s words.

NZ thanks the Chair for his capable work and he has been expressed by his chaiinr activities and congratulates Commissioner Morishita. We have always an open and honest dialogue with 

Commissioner Morishita. We extend congratulations to Andrej too.

Similar sentiments follow.  India in his compliments adds he would like to see an end to the killing fo whales.

Argentina says it is not easy to lead a plenary such as this and that Bruno has done wonderfully.

Other posts need to be filled – a new chair for the Whale Killing methods and welfare issues has to be found. Austria reports that Herman Osterhusen of South Africa  is willing to take this on. There is applause.

UK welcome’s Herman ‘he will do a fantastic job!’

A new chair for the Aborignal Subsistence Whaling subcommittee needs to be found and Jogi now nominates Bruno.

Denmark thanks Bruno for his work – and for traveling to the workshop in Greenland.

The USA congratulates him too and notes Bruno has also visited the whalers in Barrow Alaska.  

Bureau members are discussed. [The IWC Bureau is the body that makes decisions intersessionally - i.e. between the biannual meetings of the Commission.]

Australia – it has been a privilege to have served on the Bureau and would be pleased to remain in the Bureau. [Perhaps in the top draw..... sorry.]

Guinea says that we should integrate some women into the work of the Bureau

Mexico – says that one of the most active delegations in the IWC Committees is Argentina and I would like to nominate them to replace Uruguay.

Bruno concludes we have a balanced bureau and it is good to go.

But Japan says we only spoke of three countries.

St Vincent would like to nominate St Lucia. He is willing.

Time and Place of next Meeting.

.....No Japan wants a clear list of members of Bureau, is Africa represented?

The Bureu currently consists of Chair, Vice Chair, Chair of F+A, Host (Brazil), Australia, Guinea, Argentina, St Lucia

Guinea says no – he just spoke up for a woman. Ghana is still willing to serve he says and he is added.

The next meeting of the Scientific Committee will be in Bled in May 2017.

Kenya is happy to be back at the IWC and announces that they have a new law on fisheries management. This law anchors work on marine mammals very well. He has enjoyed the proceedings here and will make every effort to continue as an active member. The work of IWC is important and offer to host the 2018 Scientific Committee. They will work closely with the Secretariat and other to ensure that the SC will be enjoyable and productive. The venue will be in Nairobi or Mombasa. 

A video follows featuring lovely beach scenes and whales in the water - is this Kenya. No it is Brazil - as mentioned earlier Brazil has offered to host IWC 67! 

A Slovenian delegate comes to the stage and they thank the Slovenian Commissioner for all his work and they have a little thank you for him. Andre comes to the stage and is given a plaque. Simon is given similar and so is Mark Tandy the Secretariat lead on arrangements for the conference.

Plaque for the Slovenian Commissioner/new Vice Chair of the IWC

The nice Slovenia lady invites us to 'a toast' [this turns out to be drinks and nibbles; no small cakes]. There is again applause

The Chair thanks the Secretariat for all their hard work. Loud applause.

Bruno says he will miss the Bureau and thanks the Secretariat – there is applause.

We close the meeting. There is more applause followed by toast. 

More photos and a final analysis to follow!!

Delegates bid each other good bye

An alternative review of the last day and interpretation by Paul Spong can be found HERE.