dfree383 wrote:No I'm not gone....
I can see no commercialy viable reason to waste whales when they are not a major commodity anywhere. If they where being used to feed people that are hungry (read starving) not just people that have a "Taste" for them as a delicacy, then I'd agree with you, hunt them, regulate the take and send them to people who need food. but thats just not the case, people in the world are not starving if whales are not killed !!
As far as real commercial uses, they have all been surpassed by other products and its already been proven the supply can't keep up with the demand anyhow, so again whats the point in killing something that can't sustain the market for products?
Now if you want to start Whale Farms and breed and raise them commercialy, then more power to ya if you feel you can make it work. They do it with Fish, Shrimp, Oysters, Ect. (Again because the wild supply in alot of areas can not keep up with the demand) This could be a whole discussion in and of it self.
I feel the wild ones need to be left alone.
That's the same logic used by the eco-terrorists that set fire to auto dealerships.
It's the same logic used by the eco-terrorists that think auto racing should be banned. After all, racing serves no other purpose than to fill the wants of the people that have a "taste" for it.
BTW, you're speaking out of both ends.
First you say whales aren't a major commodity, then you say the supply can't keep up with the demand. You can't have it both ways. BTW, for every piece of whale that's eaten, that's one less piece of another animal eaten. Which animals would you prefer we kill more of to take the place of those whales? Which animals deserve to live less then the whales?
We wouldn't starve if we stopped eating Chicken, or Cow, or Lamb, or Bison, or Tuna, or Salmon, or Deer.
Why do you think you're important enough to tell us which ones should live or die?