Vegan Earth Day 2010

地球の食の安全

ビーガンの食生活と家畜フリーにおける利点

作物を育て、植物性食品を私たちの第一の食料にしていく事は、畜産業を行うよりも遙かに資源を大切にすることが出来ます。この地球では、特に発展途上国において１０億人もの人々が栄養不良です。そんな中、国連のレポートによれば実に３０億もの人々が、家畜に与えている穀物を食す事で、生きられる事が分かりました。このような理由から、最近では人々もようやく、畜産業が、２０５０年には９０億人になるだろうと言われている人口における食料危機を悪化させる事に気づき始めています。

畜産業は、人間のための食物を減らす事になります。畜産動物は、実に食料の半分以上ものエネルギーを、生きる過程において使い果たします。（これは、動く事や代謝によるものです。）ですから、畜産動物をよりも、作物を育て、人間がそれを直接食べる事で、世界規模の食糧危機を救う事になるのです。

地球の気候変動

もし私たちが畜産業から農業に転換すれば、温暖化ガス排出量を減らし、食の安全のレベルを上げる事が出来ます。

直接的ではないのですが、食の安全性は、畜産動物による温暖化ガス排出によって著しく脅かされています。既にその結果は貧困に苦しむ国々に見られ、様々な気候変動による被害を被っています。畜産業は、大量かつ強力な温暖化ガスであるメタンガス、亜硝酸ガスを生産するのです。

国連は、以下を世界的に報じています。

「畜産業は、温暖化ガスの大きな原因の一つであり、全体の１８％をも占め、二酸化炭素の排出量と同等である。これは車やトラックによるものよりも高い数値である。」

水

ビーガンの食生活を送る事は、大切な水という資源を守る事にもなります。畜産業は、水質に多大な影響を与えます。また、ビーガンでない食生活は、ビーガンの食生活よりも、実に３倍もの水を使う事になります。

国連はこう予測しています。

「２０２５年には、１８億もの人々が深刻な水不足に苦しみ、世界全体の３分の２もの人々も、悩まされる事になるだろう」

水不足は、特に南アフリカ、サハラ以南アフリカ、アジアを苦しめると予想されています。これらの国々は、既に今でも、水不足に敏感な場所なのです。

土地

正しい植物性食品による食生活は、肉食よりも少ない土地の使用で済みます。例えばイギリスでは、ビーガンの食生活をすると、食品を生産するのに、３分の２もの土地の利用を抑える事が出来るのです。

農業地の不足は、戦争を引き起こし、結果飢餓を招きます。今現在、７０％の世界中の土地が畜産業に利用されています。そして、全ての農業用地の３分の１が、家畜の飼料のために使われています。

また、放牧も、土地を痩せさせます。実に７０％もの全ての放牧地の土壌が退化しているのです。これは、過剰な放牧、家畜の過剰な密度と浸食によるものです。また、畜産牛は、アマゾン地方の森林減少の原因の内８０％を占めているのです。

● 家畜フリーにおける農場主への利点
● 家畜フリーの農場主（肥料・畜産動物関連の製品を使わない農業をする者）は肥料の生産を畜産業界に頼る必要性がありません。それにより、飼料の価格変動にも関係がないため、利益が落ち込む事がないのです。
● 家畜フリーの農場であれば、鳥インフルエンザ、狂牛病、ブルータング、ニューキャッスル病、口蹄疫などを心配する必要がありません。
● イギリスでは、酪農業において近年不安定な状況が続き、きつい限界利益と生産者の低い意欲が問題となっています。家畜フリーは、その良い代替えになることが出来るのです。
● 有機肥料、輪作、堆肥の技術はイギリスではコストのかからない方法であり、また発展途上国においては、栄養的にも優れた植物性食品の食生活を可能にする技術方法でもあるのです。
● 発展途上国では、ビーガン農業は、水不足、放牧による土地痩せの危険をなくし、水不足などによる不安定な家畜の生存に頼る事なく、家畜への依存なしの生活を送る事が出来ます。
● 私たちは植物性の食品をどのくらい生産する事が出来るのか

ＤＥＦＲＡ（英国環境・食料・農村省）が必要熱量における計算をしたところ、イギリスの農業用地で、全人口をまかなえる量の植物性食品を生産する事が出来る事が分かりました。

イギリスで現在作物のために利用されている土地は４７０万ヘクタールです。ビーガンの食生活を送れば、３００万ヘクタールでイギリス全人口をまかなう事が出来ます。ですから、わざわざ牧草地を持つ必要はなく、耕作地だけでも、十分な土地はあるのです。

家畜の居ない風景

田舎の風景を想像する際に、家畜の居ない光景を思い描く事は難しいでしょう。しかし私たちはそこへ新たな風景を作り出す事が出来るのです。例えば牧草地に使われていた土地は、よりゆったりとした、フルーツやナッツの木々、バイオマスや野生動物が住む森林に生まれ変わります。森林地は、二酸化炭素を吸収しますから、二酸化炭素排出の軽減にもなります。

Video: 農林水産省, 日本 (MAFF Japan) 2008

References

1 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 1.02 billion people hungry. http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/20568/icode/ (accessed 25 June 2009)
2 United Nations Population. World population prospects: the 2008 revision population database. http://esa.un.org/unpp/ (accessed 25 June 09)
3 Global Humanitarian Forum. The anatomy of a silent crisis. Geneva: GHF; 2009 http://ghfgeneva.org/Portals/0/pdfs/human_impact_report.pdf (accessed 25 June 2009)
4 WWF-UK. Counting Consumption. Godalming: WWF-UK; 2006 http://www.ecologicalbudget.org.uk/ (accessed 22 July 2009)
5 Walsh S. using information from Williams A.G. et al. Determining the environmental burdens and resource use in the production of agricultural and horticultural commodities. Main Report. Defra Research Project IS0205. Bedford: Cranfield University and Defra; 2006 http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=IS0205_3959_FRP.doc (accessed 25 June 2009)
6 FAO Water Unit. Water scarcity. http://www.fao.org/nr/water/issues/scarcity.html (accessed 25 June 09)
7 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Livestock’s Long Shadow: environmental issues and options. Rome: FAO; 2006ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a0701e/a0701e00.pdf (accessed 25 June 2009)
8 Greenpeace International. Slaughtering the Amazon. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International; 2009. http://www.greenpeace.org/international/press/reports/slaughtering-theamazon(accessed 25 June 2009)
9 United Nations Environment Programme. Green Revolution with a Capital G is Needed to Feed the World. 2009.http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=562&ArticleID=6084&l=en (accessed 25 June 2009)
10 United Nations Environment Programme. The environmental food crisis. Nairobi: UNEP; 2009. http://www.unep.org/publications/search/pub_details_s.asp?ID=4019 (accessed 25June 2009)
11 Friends of the Earth. What’s feeding our food? London: FoE; 2008 http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/livestock_impacts.pdf (accessed 25 June 2009)
12 Department for Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (Defra) and Food Standards Agency. GM crops and foods: Follow-up to the Food Matters Report by Defra and the FSA. London: Defra/FSA; 2009 http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/foodmattergmreport.pdf (accessed 26 August 2009)
13 Farming Futures. Case studies http://www.farmingfutures.org.uk/x10.xml (accessed 25June 2009)
14 FAO Committee on Agriculture. Managing Livestock – Environment Interactions. Rome: FAO; 2007 ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/meeting/011/j9421e.pdf (accessed 25 June 2009)
15 Walsh S. Plant based nutrition and health. The Vegan Society; 2003
16 Food Standards Agency. Eat well, be well http://www.eatwell.gov.uk/healthydiet/ (accessed 29 June 2009)
17 Hall J. and Tolhurst I. Growing green: organic techniques for a sustainable future. The Vegan Organic Network: Altrincham; 2006
18 DairyCo. Factors affecting milk supply. 2009 http://www.mdcdatum.org.uk/PDF/Factors%20Affecting%20Milk%20Supply.pdf (accesed 30June 2009)
19 Davis J. Dairy farmers warn of mass exodus over NVZ costs Farmers Guardian 1 June 2009 http://www.farmersguardian.com/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=26534 (accessed 30 June 2009)
20 Henderson L. and Gergory J. et al. National Diet and Nutrition Survey: adults aged 19-64 years Volume 1 Newport: Office for National Statistics; 2002 http://www.food.gov.uk/science/dietarysurveys/ndnsdocuments/printedreportpage (accessed 1 July 2009)
21 Select Committee on Health. Third report of the session 2003/4. London: House of Commons; 2004 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmhealth/23/2302.htm (accessed 1 July 2009)
22 Cabinet Office. Food: an analysis of the issues. London: Cabinet Office; 2008 http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/cabinetoffice/strategy/assets/food/food_analysis.pdf (accessed 1 July 2009)
23 DEFRA Food and Farming Group. Ensuring the UK’s food security in a changing world.London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; 2008 http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodrin/policy/pdf/Ensuring-UK-Food-Security-in-a-changing-world-170708.pdf (accessed 1 July 2009)
24 DEFRA. Agriculture in the UK 2008. https://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/publications/auk/2008/excel.asp (accessed 23 July 2009)
25 Fairlie S. Can Britain feed itself? The Land Winter 2007-8
26 Garnett, T. Fruit and vegetables & UK greenhouse gas emissions. Surrey: Food Climate Research Network; 2006
27 McDiarmid S. & Holding J. et al. Food Statistics Pocketbook DEFRA: York; 2008 https://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/publications/pocketstats/foodpocketstats/default.asp (accessed 30 June 2009)
28 Holmes-Ling, P. and Metcalfe, P. Natural England Carbon Baseline Survey Project http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/about_us/news/2008/300608.aspx (accessed 1 July 2009)
29 The Agroforestry Research Trust. Agroforestry News. http://www.agroforestry.co.uk/(accessed 1 July 2009)
30 Economic and social research council. Programme director’s annual report 2008: Rural development and land use. Swindon: ESRC; 2008 http://www.relu.ac.uk/news/Annual%20report%202008%20web%20version.pdf (accessed 1July 2009)
31 FAO. The state of the world’s forests 2009. Rome: FAO, 2009 http://www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0350e/i0350e00.HTM (accessed 1 July 2009)
32 Naylor R. Goldburg R. et al. Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies. Nature 2000; 405:1017-1024
33 FAO. The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2008. Rome: FAO; 2009.http://www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0250e/i0250e00.htm (accessed 23 July 2009)
34 World Wildlife Fund. Tilapia.http://www.worldwildlife.org/what/globalmarkets/aquaculture/WWFBinaryitem5384.pdf (accessed 23 July 2009)
35 World Wildlife Fund. International standards for responsible tilapia aquaculture. WWF; 2008 http://www.worldwildlife.org/what/globalmarkets/aquaculture/WWFBinaryitem10225.pdf (accessed 23 July 2009)
36 The Grocer. Consumers ‘switching to free-range chicken’ The Grocer 18 February 2009 http://www.thegrocer.co.uk/articles.aspx?page=articles&ID=124782 (accessed 1 July 2009)
37 The Grocer. The rise and stall of the ethical shopper The Grocer 31 March 2008 http://www.thegrocer.co.uk/articles.aspx?page=articles&ID=125587 (accessed 1 July 2009)

Itadaki Zen: Vegan Japan in London, UK

Itadaki Zen’s concept is to provide a source of food which is both very healthy and with little environmental impact … thus organic and vegan.

It is also a social project, attempting to raise awareness about food issues while connect customers to the Academy’s organic farming and eco projects. One such project is being run at Culdees in Scotland, others are taking place in Japan, where there is a small renaissance of interest in traditional farming taking place amongst some young people, Africa and Italy. Entertainment nights include event featuring shamisen music, as well as jazz and classical.

Itadaki Zen looks like a fairly traditional Japanese restaurant furnished in natural colours with minimal decoration. The venue has been renovated by a volunteer group based on the Japanese agricultural philosophy this restaurant takes its name from.

All the wooden tables have been made and fitted by hand, and the chairs stripped bare of varnish to reveal the natural wood underneath. The walls are covered in a mixture of lime, clay and straw, giving them a warm yellow tone. The darker wooden elements have been dyed using homemade sharon fruit (called kaki in Japan) extract. As is usual with Japanese restaurants, there is a row of seat perfect for solo diners in a hurry.

Dishes include harumaki, agesan sushi rolls, agedashi tofu, vegetable tempura and desserts such as kanten and warabe mochi are available.

Readers in Japan, where the vegan movement is still in its infancy and food fashion fads still ape the West, might be very surprised to discover the profound influence traditional Japanese diet and ingredients have had on the Western wholefood and vegan movements. This is especially thanks to the work of followers of the Japanese macrobiotic teacher, George Ohsawa, such a Craig and Greg Sams.

The Sams Brothers were the two of the original pioneers of wholefoods in the UK and early importers of high quality, organic Japanese staple foods such as misos, tamari, brown rice, soba. They popularised the traditional Japanese diet and lifestyle through their 1960s magazine called Harmony and a restaurant in Notting Hill called Seed, popular with musicians and artists such as John Lennon and Yoko Ono. They also promoted it at many free events targeting the 60s opinion forming “counter culture” generation. This spread from the UK to Europe at the same time as others such as Herman and Cornelia Aihara, and the Kushis, were promoting it in the USA.

The Japanese influence remains to this day and it has benefited the health of the vegan movement in the West hugely.

Address: 139 King’s Cross Road
London WC1X 9BJ
Tel: 02072783573
E: info@itadakizen.com

Mon~Thu: 11:00am~10:30pm
Fri~Sat: 11:00am~11:00pm
Sunday : Closed

The Cove Dolphin Hunt Documentary wins an Oscar

The Cove movie, discussed earlier, has won the 2010 Oscar for the Best Documentary at this years Academy Award ceremony. The award has sparked off controversy within the Japan media and the usual, well rehearsed race-based and nationalist counter-accusations about “culture” and “tradition”.

Director Louie Psihoyos, who points out that the dolphin slaughter of Taiji is a ‘tradition’ started in the 1930s and is poisoning locals with mercury, said his crew made the film to give the oceans a voice. They told the story of The Cove because they witnessed a crime. Not just a crime against nature, but a crime against humanity.

The makers made the movie because through plundering, pollution and acidification from burning fossil fuels, all of ocean life is in peril, from the great whales to plankton which is responsible for half the oxygen we breath. He begged Japanese people to see the movie and decide for themselves. The producers also announced a distribution deal for a Japanese version of the documentary and a Japanese language website.

Recently the Taiji townspeople were mandated for mercury testing because of this movie and it was found that males had 20 times more mercury in their blood and the women 10 times more than other Japanese people.

In Japan, the media and authorities are attempting to stigmatize both the anti-dolphin and anti-whaling campaigns in two ways and play on Japanese fears and prejudice.

Firstly, as an attack on Japan and “Japanese culture” by caucasians, and
Secondly, by claiming that the animal rights protesters are primarily motivated by the desire for money.

In the first case, there is no consideration given to the fact that such protesters are not supported by their native governments, have no nationalist agenda and the truth being that many such groups are equally reviled by conservatives at home. The government agencies and media play on the inward-looking and defensive nature of the Japan public who, quite rightly, feel they have been subjected to Western racism in general.

In the second case, it underlines a problem experience by many not-for-profit organizations and campaigns in Japan. The independent voluntary sector in Japan is very young. Legislation allowing the registration of NPOs only was only created in 1995 and is still being developed. The nature of charitable work outside of one’s own community, or philanthropy, is not well understood, appreciated or trusted. For example, by comparison, American people, gives 8 times more to charity than Japanese.

In Japan, NPOs have come to be valued as “pure but poor” and the forthrightness of American fund raising is alien to them. A stance which, combined with a lack of PR skills and a social distaste of confrontational tactics, disadvantages activist groups.

Europe Grants Animals Legal Status of Sentient Beings

On December 1st, the European Union granted the legal of “sentient beings” to fish and farmed animals for the first time. The political victory will shape all future legal measures in Europe related to raising, transporting and slaughtering animals.

“A sentient animal is one for whom feelings matter.”

John Webster, Professor Emeritus, University of Bristol

The efforts were started by Compassion in World Farming in the 1980s and became the basis for a persistent, long-term campaign. At first, in 1991, on the grounds of a petition to the European Parliament, these had “sentient” being recognized as a status in a non-binding treaty declaration. In 1997, “sentience” was included in a treaty protocol, which then carried some legal force. Now, in 2009, this status has been granted in the main text of the Lisbon Treaty. It carries even far more legal power.

The gains won this year have set a vital precedent.

Philip Lymberry, who runs Compassion In World Farming, said that a dream had come true. The charity promised to work onto their next target of putting an end to factory farming and the long distance transport of animals.

“In formulating and implementing the Union’s agriculture, fisheries, transport, internal market, research and technological development and space policies, the Union and the Member States shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals, while respecting the legislative or administrative provisions and customs of the Member States relating in particular to religious rites, cultural traditions and regional heritage.”

Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union, from the Official Journal of the European Union.

Animal rights victories are all about setting legal precedents, Compassion In World Farming said. This victory will not only advance the possibilities for animal protection in Europe, it will also give activists all around the world encouragement and grounds to seeking similar protection in their own nation.

Such political developments in Europe are not new. In fact, from 1800 onwards there were many attempts to introduce animal welfare or rights legislation.

Looking at this century, the New Zealand’s Parliament enshrined in law protection for “non-human hominids”, more commonly known as great apes. The Animal Welfare Act became law from January 1st 2000, prohibiting research, testing, or teaching on chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, orangutans.

The NZ Minister for Food and Fibre, John Luxton, who was responsible for the passage of the bill through Parliament, stated, “This requirement recognizes the advanced cognitive and emotional capacity of great apes. New Zealand is the first country in the world to legislate in this way.”

In Holland a political party called ‘The Party for the Animals‘ was established in October 2002 to protect the interests of animals. It already has 2 of the 150 seats in the Dutch House of Representatives. Partij Voor De Dieren was the first party in the world to gain parliamentary seats with an agenda focused primarily on animal rights.

In 2008 apes received legal rights when Spain become the first country to extend legal rights to primates, outlawing harmful experiments on them. The Spanish parliament’s environmental committee voted to approve resolutions committing the country to the Great Apes Project, designed by scientists and philosophers who say that humans’ closest biological relatives also deserve rights.

The Lisbon Treaty comes into force on December 1st 2009.

The World is Vegan …

In 1969, during America’s invasion of Vietnam, John Lennon and Yoko Ono had a billboard placed in Times Square, New York. The campaign was so controversial that it brought John in conflict with President Nixon and the CIA over their politics of war … but it successfully spread across the world.

Billboards, posters and leaflets appeared lighting fires of peace in Los Angeles, Toronto, Rome, Athens, Amsterdam, Berlin, Paris, London, Tokyo, Hong Kong and elsewhere. It caused an uproar in the media, was celebrated in song (with a special message for Kyoko), and is still sending out ripples even today.

The billboards read …

“WAR IS OVER!
If you want it

Happy Christmas from John and Yoko.”

40 years to the day later, Professor Gary L. Francione proposes that we create a virtual billboard campaign of banner adverts for website.

“THE WORLD IS VEGAN!
If you want it.”
www.TheWorldisVegan.com

The message is now spreading all around the world in many languages.

The purpose of this campaign is to remind us that veganism is OUR choice. We have the ability to say no to violence.

We have the ability to affirm the personhood of animals. We have the ability to reject the status of animals as property. We have the ability to say no to speciesism.

We have the ability to solve the problem of animal exploitation in the only way it can be solved: by abolishing the demand for animal products.

Distinguished Professor of Law Gary L. Francione

The Abolitionist Approach* versus the Animal Welfare Approach.

(download image above, here)

Today, the animal rights movement, caring society, is split between those who seek the ‘abolition’ of animal exploitation and those who seek the ‘regulation’ of animal exploitation … the so-called “Happy Meat People”.

The moral baseline of an animal rights movement is Veganism. Veganism is not an external fashion. it is not simply a matter of diet.

Veganism is a moral and political commitment to the abolition of animal exploitation, on the individual level, which extends not only to matters of food but also to clothing & other products. It effects personal actions and choices. It effects and changes the way we relate to and value life as a whole.

Just as an abolitionist of the suffering of ‘human slavery’ could not continue to be a ‘slaveowner’, an abolitionist with respect to ‘animal slavery’ cannot continue to consume or use animal flesh or animal products that involve suffering.

Veganism rejects violence and promotes activism in the form of creative, non-violent vegan education.

Violence treats others as means to ends rather than as ends in themselves. When we engage in violence against others – whether they are human or nonhuman – we ignore their inherent value. We treat them only as things that have no value except that which we decide to give them.

This is what leads people to engage in crimes of violence against people of other races, women, etc. It is what leads us to commodify non-human animals and treat them as resources which exist solely for our use. All of it is wrong and should be rejected.

adapted from Prof. Gary L. Francione

War between nations is all too often made possible by false propaganda which de-humanizes and devalues outsiders. Business and political leaders essentially brainwash uninformed and uneducated individuals into carrying out crimes, or murdering others, for the sake of financial profit.

Business and political leaders are still, essentially, brainwashing uninformed and uneducated individuals into murdering and consuming others species, for the sake of financial profit (via advertising and media control). A war for profit that is all too often is in other nation’s financial interests.

* “Abolitionism” was a social movement in Western Europe and the Americas. It set out to end the slave trade and free all human slaves. Slaves, like females, were not considered full human beings. They were merely property without rights, like animals today.

The slave system aroused little criticism until the 1700s, when a handful of leading thinkers criticized it for violating human spiritual rights. Quakers who were themselves persecuted by the State and State religion, along with other groups, condemned slavery as being un-Christian.

Thanks to their opposition and work, only a few decades later, Britain banned the importation of African slaves, and the United States followed in 1808. Slavery was abolished by the British in 1827, and the French 15 years later.

Open letter to the Prime Minister of Japan

Open letter regarding contaminated whale, dolphin and porpoise products from ongoing commercial hunts in Japan. Please copy and send.

Dear Prime Minister,

We represent citizens and organizations worldwide that have serious concerns about the slaughter of whales, dolphins and porpoises in your country and the sale of contaminated products which seriously jeopardizes the health of your citizens.

Your Government sets annual catch quotas for around 20,000 toothed cetaceans (dolphins, porpoises and toothed whales). In recent years, around 15,000 animals have been killed each year. Toothed cetacean products are sold across Japan and are even distributed to school and hospital canteens in some areas. However, these toothed cetaceans are highly contaminated with mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and other toxic substances which have bio-accumulated through the food chain.

Since the 1980s, scientists from Japan and around the world have found alarmingly high levels of toxic substances in toothed cetacean products on sale in Japanese markets and supermarkets.

Concentrations in some samples exceeded your Government’s own safety limit for mercury by up to 5,000 times. Mercury and other toxic substances are known to cause neurological disorders (with impacts on reaction time, attention span, language and memory), an increased risk of Parkinson’s disease, arteriosclerosis, immune subsystem suppression, and hypertension. Threats to children include autism, Asperger’s Syndrome and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).

A survey conducted by Elsa Nature Conservancy in 2008 found that more than 90 percent of people responding were not sufficiently informed about the high levels of toxic substances in dolphin products and therefore not aware of the serious health risks for consumers.

Given the many peer-reviewed scientific publications available confirming the effects of these dangerous contaminant levels on consumers, we cannot understand why your Government continues to set quotas for these hunts, and why the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) is not taking action to prevent the sale and consumption of highly contaminated cetacean food products. The MHLW website does not even sufficiently inform Japanese citizens about the contamination levels in cetacean products, and its 2005 seafood advisory is totally inadequate to protect consumers from the health risks associated with consuming toothed cetacean products.

Legislation to ban the sale of contaminated cetacean products is urgently required. Until this legislation is enacted, we ask that you urge the Minister of Health to require retailers to display warning labels on all cetacean products, advising consumers of potentially high contamination levels.

Our Alliance notes that the National Institute for Minamata Disease (NIMD) has recently collected more than 1000 hair samples from citizens of the dolphin hunting town of Taiji, in Wakayama, to analyze the mercury content. We strongly welcome this step as an indication that authorities share our concerns about the health risks related to the consumption of toothed cetacean products.

However, we are concerned at information published in AERA, the weekly magazine of Asahi Shimbun, which suggests that the investigation was limited to biochemical analysis of the collected hair samples and did not include tests for neurological disorders that are recommended by leading Japanese medical scientists.

Despite the failure by national and local authorities to examine this issue comprehensively, it is clear from NIMD’s preliminary results that there is great cause for concern. According to AERA, a ‘significant’ number of cases reported levels of mercury more than 20 times higher than national average levels and higher than levels known to cause central nervous system damage.

Given the discovery of Minamata disease in the 1950s and the subsequent failure by the Government of Japan to respond to the major mercury poisoning event which resulted in the deaths of more than 1,700 people, we are shocked that the Japanese government is not taking a precautionary response to this problem.

We strongly urge your Government to refrain from setting any future catch quotas for toothed cetaceans and to prohibit the sale of polluted cetacean products. We respectfully request that you urge the respective agencies responsible for these issues to work closely with the newly established Consumers Affairs Agency to expedite this process to a satisfactory conclusion.

The world is now watching the new Japanese Government to see how it will handle this urgent matter: Will it continue to allow the cruel and unnecessary slaughter of dolphins and other toothed cetaceans or will it make the right decision and choose to protect Japanese people from the consumption of contaminated cetacean products?

We look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,

Clare Perry, Environmental Investigation Agency

Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama
1-6-1 Nagata-cho
Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo 100-8968
Japan

cc. Dr. Margaret Chan, Director-General World Health Organisation (WHO) and JECFA (Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives), 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland

For and on behalf of:

Advocates for Animals, UK
All Life in a Viable Environment,
Japan Animal Welfare Institute,
USA Blue Voice.org, USA
Campaign Whale, UK
Campaigns Against the Cruelty to Animals (CATCA),
Canada Canadian Marine Environment Protection Society, Canada,
Cetacean Society International, USA
Cocoon, Japan
Consumers Union of Japan,
Japan Dolphin Connection, USA Dyrenes Venner, Denmark
Earth Island Institute’s International Marine Mammal Project,
USA Eastern Caribbean Coalition for Environmental Awareness (ECCEA)
Elsa Nature Conservancy, Japan
Fundacion Cethus, Argentina
Happy Tail, Japan
Harmonics Life Center, Japan Humane Society International Institute of Biodiversity in Japan, Japan
In Defense of Animals (IDA), USA
International Fund for Animal Welfare
LegaSeaS International, USA
Lokahi, Japan
Lunta no Niwa, Japan
Marine Connection,
UK MEER. e.v.,
Germany National Council of SPCAs (NSPCA),
South Africa OceanCare,
Switzerland Oceanic Preservation Society (OPS),
USA Orca Network,
USA Pacific Whale Foundation, Hawaii, USA
PangeaSeed, Japan
Pro Wildlife,
Germany Project Jonah,
New Zealand Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA)
Save Japans Dolphins Coalition Society for the Conservation of Marine Mammals (GSM),
Germany Society for the Conservation of Marine Mammals,
Denmark Tethys Research Institute, Italy
The Whaleman Foundation, USA
Tulsi, Dog & Vege-restaurant, Japan
NPO Uzu, Japan
Warabe Mura, Japan
Whale & Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS), UK
World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA), UK
Keisuke Amagasa: NO! GMO Campaign, Japan
Harukichi Onoduka: The Japan Scientists’ Association, Japan
Shoei Go: NPO Minga Village, Shiga, Japan
Satish Kumar: chief editor of “Resurgence”

This letter was drafted by an international alliance of environmental organizations concerned about marine pollution and related human health effects which was established by Elsa Nature Conservancy (Japan), the Environmental Investigation Agency (UK), Oceancare (Switzerland), Pro Wildlife (Germany), Society for the Conservation of Marine Mammals (Denmark) and the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (UK).

Further information regarding contamination of cetacean products in Japan can be found via the links below:

Endo, T., Hotta, Y., Haraguchi, K., and Sakata, M. 2003. Mercury Contamination in the Red Meat of Whales and Dolphins Marketed for Human Consumption in Japan. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2003, 37 (12), pp 2681–2685.

Poisonous Policies – Japan’s failure to stop the sale of polluted whale, dolphin and porpoise products. Available in Japanese and English.

Toxic Menu – Contamination of whale meat and impact on consumers’ health.

Mercury Contamination is Threatening Our Dining Table –An Investigative Report. Available in English and Japanese.