The day the sea turned red

Seven-year-old Emma places her hand on the edge of the boat as she stares at the horizon, her eyes squinting from the wind as our boat heads out from the bay. Her mother Gurli is sitting next to her, her arm around her daughter’s shoulders, while her father Vilhelm steers among the 50-odd fishing vessels making their way towards the open ocean. Our aim is to the help herd whales towards a beach, where a grindadráp, the Faroese word literally translated as ‘whale slaughter’, will take place.

Less than ten minutes pass and the boats form a semicircle behind a school of pilot whales – the boat in the centre flies the white, blue and red Faroese flag. On the whaling foreman’s signal, stones attached to lines are thrown into the ocean. Men and boys lean forward over the bows, slapping the hulls of the boats, throwing stones and shouting in the direction of the whales. The stones create a wall of bubbles which the whales perceive as a solid barrier that they must avoid. These combined noises disturb the whales, making them turn away from the boats, and help tempt the grind (pronounced grinned, with a short i), the Faroese word for whale, towards the beach in Sandavágur, one of twenty-two government-designated whaling beaches. Once the whales reach the beach, they have nowhere else to turn – the boats behind them, the beach in front.

On the beach, dozens more men and boys, and the occasional woman, form a line – their eyes filled with eagerness and concentration, their stances like racehorses behind their gates, waiting to be released. It is Thursday during working hours, yet people have stopped working and gathered from all over the country to either participate or witness. Children have been given time off school to join on-lookers.

The feeling in the air is one of hopeful anticipation and tense impatience. The grind is stranded as it approaches the shallow water, not able to turn or dive away, and the captain of the flag boat shouts the order. The tension is broken. The hunters sprint into the ocean amongst the thrashing and panicking whales, armed with hooks and whaling knives.

A man wearing a traditional Faroese brown jumper is waist-high in ocean water as he inserts a blunt-tipped hook attached to a long rope into a whale’s blowhole. Men on the beach, in groups of ten or more, hold the rope and pull the whale, which weighs approximately one tonne, to the shoreline, where men use their whaling knives to slice through the thick skin, blubber, and muscle to expose and break the whales’ spinal cord. The time it takes to actually kill the whale is measured in seconds. Within minutes, the ocean is scarlet with warm blood.

The noises are that of water splashing, gulls squeaking above, and the loud, resolved voices of men giving orders to each other; not to mention the hums of engines as boats swerve back and forth, trying to herd the last of the whales, who now seem distressed and disorientated, towards the beach. Among the hunters, there seems to be a sense of order amongst the chaos – not surprisingly, perhaps, given the amount of experience gained through centuries of whale hunting. From the person who first spots the pod of whales and calls the sýslumaður (the district sheriff who informs the public), to the person at the end of the rope, everyone knows his or her role down to a tee. In ancient times, news of whale spottings would be conveyed from village to village by either runners or bonfires on mountaintops. A bonfire would signal a grindadráp about to happen, and men and boys would rush to neighbouring villages to take part.

As our boat swerves back and forth, herding the last of the whales onto the beach, I notice Emma is not the only child allowed on a boat. “My daughter wanted to come along, so of course I let her,” says Vilhelm. “This tradition lies deep within us Faroe Islanders, and it’s not something she will get nightmares from. For us, this is not violent as it maybe is for those who are not used to killing animals themselves.”

Approximately half an hour has passed since the first whales were herded onto the beach and the grindadráp is now over. 107 pilot whales lie dead on the beach. There is no cheering, no chanting, no high-fives, yet there’s a palpable sense of accomplishment, relief, and happiness.

---

The Faroe Islands, a small archipelago of 18 islands in the North Atlantic Ocean under Danish sovereignty, have practised this tradition for more than ten centuries. The earliest recorded grindadráp took place in 1584, and – with the exception of a few years in the 1600s – written records have existed since. From 1584 to present day, on average 700 whales have been killed annually. Whale hunts usually range between 50 to 250 whales each time, but these numbers vary greatly; the largest recorded slaughter is 1200 pilot whales in Sandur in 1940. Not surprisingly, this tradition is deeply rooted in Faroese national identity.

Emma’s uncle, twenty-five-year-old Jóhannus, is one of the hunters on the beach, and has participated in whale slaughters since he was a teenager. “I completely support the killing of these whales,” he says, as he wipes blood off his whaling knife. “I do so because the hunt is sustainable, we use everything we can from the whales, we don’t take any more than we need, and everyone gets an equal proportion of the meat and blubber, no matter what their role. The grind is good and tastes great, and it’s free. All in all, a brilliant food system.”

Vilhelm agrees, saying: “I’ve grown up accustomed to using the food resources that are in our environment, so killing these whales is completely normal for me. It’s no different to killing sheep, cows, or any other animal for food.”

---

A couple of hours have now passed. The ocean remains scarlet but the whales have been removed from the beach and taken to a nearby dock where they are measured. Hundreds of people are gathered and have signed up for their portion of the whale meat and blubber; anyone is allowed to write their name on the list, with the catch distributed free of charge to hunt participants and, in some cases, all adult residents in the district. Those who are too ill or unwell to participate also receive a portion.

Using an old measuring technique and specified rules, the catch is divided into shares; the size depends on the amount of whales and people signed up. In most cases, each portion accounts for dozens of meals for each family. The task of cutting the whales and precise distribution of the meat and blubber is left to the men and women allotted each whale. There are no quotas, but certain beaches or entire whaling districts can be closed if harvests are considered sufficient. Elected whaling foremen, under the supervision of the sýslumaður, oversee the hunt. The sýslumaður also supervises the valuation and distribution of the catch, and is responsible for keeping records of the harvest.

---

Although this tradition has been practised for centuries, it has met fierce opposition from environmental and marine wildlife conservation groups in recent decades. The organisation that has made most noise is undoubtedly Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, an international non-profit, marine wildlife conservation organization who, according to their Captain, Paul Watson, “intervene against the exploitation, and especially the illegal exploitation, of marine wildlife”, claiming the hunt is unsustainable, animal cruelty and not in accordance with international whaling regulations.

It’s not only outside forces that have contributed to the debate around the grindadráp. In 2008, Dr Pál Weihe, chief physician at the Department of Occupational and Public Health in the Faroese Hospital System, and Dr Høgni Debes Joensen, chief medical officer at the same institution, concluded through extensive research dating back to 1984 that pilot whale meat and blubber is not fit for human consumption, citing numerous adverse health effects on foetuses, children and adults because of the high levels of mercury and other detrimental pollutants in the whale meat and blubber.

---

Although Dr Weihe and Joensen’s research is well respected, there are those who disagree with the actual recommendation. Kate Sanderson, former director of the Department of Oceans and Environment of the Faroese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and current Head of the Mission of the Faroes to the EU, says there is not enough scientific proof that the risks of eating the grind outweigh the benefits. “Of course we should listen to advice on health issues, and, for the most part, we have,” says Mrs Sanderson. “But it’s important to look at the bigger picture. This is an extremely valuable tradition, both socially and economically, and we need more scientific evidence that does not just point to the likelihood of negative effects, but that points to the direct effects of eating grind. Before we completely disregard the grind, we need hard scientific evidence that the risks do, indeed, outweigh the benefits, which we know are many.”

---

Six hours have passed since the grindadráp on the beach in Sandavágur. The remains of the whales have been discarded, and people have gone home, their boxes and wheelbarrows full of meat and blubber. While Emma is fast asleep in her bed, Vilhelm and Jóhannus work late into the night, storing some of the whale meat and blubber in salted kegs; these will be revisited often throughout the approaching autumn and winter. Other portions of the meat are hung up to dry, while some meat is left fresh to be used for dinner the next day.

The beach is now empty and quiet, and the excitement has subsided. With every new wave, the ocean slowly returns to its blue state.

Pictures: Tróndur Dalsgarð

Contaminated whale meat and blubber: The health issue

Imagine walking into McDonalds. The Big Mac, your favourite burger that you’ve eaten regularly since childhood, is free of charge for the day. You’re told before you order that the beef is contaminated and may have adverse effects on your long-term health. One cashier says you’re welcome to order the Big Mac but advises against it, while another cashier says you’ll be fine, as long as it’s the only beef you have that month.

Replace the Big Mac with pilot whale meat and blubber and the decision you have to make resembles a choice many Faroe Islanders must make on a regular basis. They must choose between listening to certain people telling them to stop eating a free food they have eaten for a lifetime because of its dangerous contaminants, or others saying they should eat it only once a month. A third choice is obviously to not listen to any health advice and eat it regularly.

“My girlfriend Jóna and I have never given Tinna whale meat or blubber,” says Tróndur, as their four-year-old daughter plays on the floor. “We love the taste, but we do not feel that the risks associated with the negative health effects outweigh the good things it has to offer, such as the protein and fatty acids in the meat and blubber. The health recommendation is very clear, and we have decided to stick to that.”

The recommendation Tróndur refers to is that of Dr Pál Weihe, chief physician at the Department of Occupational and Public Health in the Faroese Hospital System, and Dr Høgni Debes Joensen, chief medical officer at the same institution. Based on extensive research dating back to 1984, they concluded in 2008 that pilot whale meat and blubber, called grind in Faroese, is not fit for human consumption. Because of man-made pollution in the oceans, pilot whales in the North Atlantic Ocean contain dangerously high levels of mercury and other detrimental contaminants, such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), that can have adverse effects on foetuses, children and adults. Dr Weihe and Dr Joensen claim there are a number of negative effects, such as the contaminants of the blubber adversely affecting the immune system so that children react more poorly to immunizations. Also, they argue that contaminants in pilot whales appear to increase the risk of developing Parkinson’s Disease in those who often eat pilot whale, and the risk of hypertension and arteriosclerosis of the carotid arteries is increased in adults who have an increased exposure to mercury.

“Because of its high levels of mercury and other pollutants, grind would never be allowed to be sold in any supermarket in the EU or America,” says Dr Weihe, who as a young man participated in many whale hunts and ate grind regularly, until his 2008 health recommendation was published. “We were forced to ask ourselves, ‘It is OK for us to turn a blind eye to the obvious health risks involved in eating whale meat and blubber solely because of cultural reasons, or because some are driven by extreme nationalism, especially when faced with opposition from those who want us to stop the whaling?’ Our answer was ‘no’. We have assessed this food in exactly the same way as if it meant nothing to our cultural identity. Our job as public health officials is look at the facts, regardless. It’s up to people if they want to listen or not.”

Dr Weihe and Dr Joensen’s research has followed approximately 2,300 men, woman and children since 1984. The research has not shown any visible negative effect on any one individual directly related to eating grind. However, the study, which analyses two groups of people (those who have eaten grind, and those who have not), has shown a negative relationship between mercury intake and mental performance, such as reaction time and linguistic performance, on a group basis. Dr Weihe says high levels of mercury steal some of people’s intelligence, and says this can be avoided by not eating contaminated grind. He points to fish as a viable alternative food source.

Some Faroe Islanders, such as journalist Hilmar Jan Hansen, argue that other foods, such as imported foods, also contain contaminants, which are equally bad for one’s health, and deem these just as bad as the ones found in grind. “I haven’t and I won’t listen to Dr Weihe’s recommendation,” says Hilmar Jan. “I’m afraid this recommendation was made because it’s deemed ‘politically correct’ to attack everything that is natural and traditional. It’s especially worrying that these recommendations have stopped nursing homes from giving grind to the elderly – food that they have eaten all their lives. Do you think it’s better to give them lasagne and pizza? All the beef and factory produced food we import is certainly not suitable for human consumption in comparison to all the good, natural food we have in the Faroes.”

Dr Weihe dismisses these claims, saying imported food is controlled before it enters the country. “I won’t claim that other foods don’t contain contaminants, but we are certainly not aware of these,” he says. “It is easy to say that imported food is contaminated, but that is more a figure of speech than hard facts. As a health official, I can’t draw conclusions from something that isn’t factual. I can’t allow myself to be sentimental.”

---

Although Dr Weihe advises the Faroese public, a population of 50,000 people, against eating grind, he has no problem with the slaughter itself. “I agree with my fellow countrymen who say it is our biological right to kill whales. But because of the health risks involved, I must advise them against eating the meat.” Some have urged the government to intervene by banning the slaughter altogether, but Dr Weihe doesn’t believe making it illegal to kill whales is the right course of action. “This is a battle that must be won in people’s heads, not in a court.”

Perhaps it would be easier to win this battle if the Faroese public only had one recommendation to adhere to. In fact, the government-funded Faroese Food and Veterinary Authority (FFVA), which, among other things, submits reports to the Ministry of Trade and Industry about the state of animals’ health, issued its own health recommendation in 2011. This recommendation says people should not refrain from eating grind completely, but should limit themselves to one pilot whale meat and blubber meal per month (calculated at 250 grams of meat and 50 grams of blubber using an average person’s weight of 70 kg). Special recommendations are issued for women and girls, who are told to refrain from eating blubber as long as they plan on having children, and to not eat whale meat while pregnant or breastfeeding.

One reason for publishing a different recommendation to that of Dr Weihe and Dr Joensen is that the Faroese Food and Veterinary Authority has used the EU’s tolerable weekly intake (TWI) limit of mercury, as opposed to the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (US-EPA) one used by Dr Weihe and Dr Joensen. Grind contains approximately 2 micrograms of mercury per gram. The EU’s TWI limit is set at 1 microgram per gram, while the US-EPA’s TWI limit is set at 0,7 microgram per gram.

The FFVA’s recommendation has met opposition from various corners, including from Dr Weihe. According to him, one meal of pilot whale meat and blubber a month surpasses even the EU’s tolerable weekly intake limit of mercury, let alone the US-EPA one. Following the US-EPA limit corresponds to eating 98 grams of whale meat a month before a person reaches their monthly mercury quota. The problem, as Dr Weihe observes, is that this leaves no room for eating other supposedly healthier marine foods, such as fish, because a person’s mercury quota is filled from eating grind alone.

Dr Erla Olsen, Assistant Biology Professor at the Department of Education at the University of the Faroe Islands, claims the Faroese government could not accept Dr Weihe and Dr Joensen’s recommendation and therefore asked the FFVA to produce their own recommendation. “That the grind is not fit for human consumption has been confirmed in a recommendation done by our leading health specialists, through numerous studies which have received huge recognition overseas,” says Dr Olsen. “That the political system did not accept the recommendation for any reason does not change the fact that the grind is not fit for human consumption.”

---

Even though the FFVA’s recommendation from 2011 is contested by some, it has won support from others, including a colleague of Dr Olsen’s at the University of the Faroe Islands. In his 2011 Workshop Report and 2013 Technical Report, Dr Hóraldur Joensen, Biology Professor and Senior Lecturer at the Department of Science and Technology at the University of the Faroe Islands, concluded current data is insufficient to conduct a valid evaluation of the risks and benefits of eating the grind. Dr H. Joensen, who continues to eat the grind (albeit less than previously), says even though it hasn’t been done so far, the technology needed to remove pollutants from whale meat and blubber has been developed, and highlights the potential within this area.

Dr H. Joensen adds that other common fish, such as aged halibut and haddock, also contain relatively high levels of cadmium and mercury. “There is no doubt that grind is contaminated, and I have also limited how much I eat of it, but there has not been enough research which examines whether or not the risks truly outweigh the benefits. Until such evidence exists, I will continue to eat grind.”

The Faroese government is clear. Kate Sanderson, Head of the Mission of the Faroes to the EU, and official Faroese spokeswoman on matters of whaling, says people should follow the official FFVA recommendation of eating only one grind meal a month. “It’s problematic that people can choose between two different recommendations,” says Mrs Sanderson. “The FFVA, which holds complete authority to produce public health recommendations, has clearly stated that it is safe to eat grind within the recommended limits. It’s a very radical step from saying that grind contains contaminants to advising against eating it completely.”

Mrs Sanderson echoes Dr H. Joensen’s concerns that not enough research has been done to determine whether or not the risks of eating grind outweigh the benefits. Mrs Sanderson says there is not enough evidence to suggest that eating grind negatively affects adults. “It’s well documented that the public have decreased their number of grind meals since Dr Weihe’s recommendation to do so in 1998, and it has been proven that mercury levels have fallen since. So what’s the problem?” asks Mrs Sanderson. “Do Faroe Islanders have problems with producing children? No. Are we dropping like flies at the age of 60? No. Is our life expectancy lower than our neighbouring countries? No. So what basis is there to continuously focus on this issue when nothing in society actually points to a problem?”

Like many other Faroese, Kári Klettsgarð í Kongstovu, first officer on a Faroese fishing vessel and a regular whale hunter, has listened to Dr Weihe’s recommendation and reduced the amount of grind he eats, but has not stopped completely. “There is so much other food available, like soda, which is bad for people’s health,” says Kári. “I don’t eat as much grind as I used to, but Dr Weihe’s recommendation has not stopped me completely from eating it.” Another grind eater, Faroese journalist Teitur Joensen (who has also decreased the amounts he eats), says there will always be people who want to hunt and eat grind, and believes they should be allowed to do so. He says: “The information available today on the health issue is so extensive that whether or not people eat it should be at their own expense.”

---

In addition to examining all the good things grind has to offer as a source of healthy nutrients, such as protein, fatty acids and selenium, Mrs Sanderson also highlights the need to take into consideration other areas, such as its social significance. “Faroese whaling is a complex tradition, built upon strict rules and regulations and highly detailed systems,” she says. “The knowhow of the slaughter, the grindadráp, is something which is passed on from generation to generation. It’s more than just a source of food; it’s a way of life that helps maintain relations between people, families and whole communities. Although this in itself doesn’t justify risking one’s health, it’s certainly one aspect that should be considered in the debate. The bottom-line is that we need more research and debate before we advise against eating grind completely, and, in fact, frighten people, as Dr Weihe has done.”

Mrs Sanderson also considers it problematic that the same person who has done the research produces the recommendation that advises complete abandonment of eating grind. “Although I don’t question Dr Weihe’s research in itself, I do have a problem with him drawing conclusions from his own research and creating his own health recommendation. One can’t say that a food consists of contaminants and then just advise against eating it altogether. There is a reason why we have the FFVA. It is their job to advise the public on matters of diet and nutrition – not Dr Weihe’s.”

---

One thing Mrs Sanderson and Dr Weihe do agree on is their message to the outside world: “You have helped pollute the oceans that our whales are swimming in. Rather than condemn us, focus instead your energy on helping us keep the oceans clean.”

Tinna’s parents, Tróndur and Jóna, are aware of the conflicting recommendations but are certain about their decision – for now. They don’t rule out eating grind again in the future. “As long as we plan on having more children, we will refrain from eating grind and won’t feed it to Tinna,” says Tróndur. “It’s a parent’s job to protect his or her child, and the risks involved don’t make eating grind worth it. But there’s still a chance we would return to it in the future – if the grind is still around then.”

Pictures: Tróndur Dalsgarð

“Whales are highly intelligent, socially complex, sentient beings, and I consider the killing of whales or dolphins as murder.”

Gory. Barbaric. Tasteless. Uncivilized. It’s common to hear these adjectives used when someone describes the traditional whale slaughter in the Faroe Islands – and it’s not difficult to understand why. Witnessing the slaughter on a beach is like standing in an open-air abattoir. There are hooks, ropes, and knives. There is pulling, hooking and cutting. And there’s blood, lots of blood – each drop magnifying the overall powerful visual impact of the kill.

Kate Sanderson, official Faroese spokeswoman on whaling and supporter of the whale slaughter, says no matter what your opinion on the matter, there’s no denying the very graphic scenes of a slaughter, called the grindadráp in Faroese. “It’s a very dramatic and bloody event to any eye, be it Faroese or foreign,” says Mrs Sanderson.

Although Faroe Islanders, who number 50,000 in total, acknowledge the dramatic nature of the grindadráp, their relaxed relationship to it is founded on centuries of whale slaughters. Written records of whale catches in this isolated and rugged country with deep fjords and rocky coastlines date back to 1584, and are widely believed to extend back over 10 centuries. Today, Faroe Islanders mainly hunt pilot whales, but catches sometimes include whitesided and bottlenose dolphins, as well as bottlenose whales on rare occasions.

“When I was a child, witnessing a grindadráp was as natural as going fishing or shooting birds,” says Olga Biskopstø, sociologist at the University of the Faroe Islands. “As children, we sympathised with the whales, especially baby whales. But we understood that it was necessary, and that for us to eat meat, animals had to be killed.” Another Faroe Islander, Elin Brimheim Heinesen, who has participated in numerous debates on Faroese whaling, says she grew up in a traditional Faroese family of farmers who had a very down-to-earth view of life, in which humans and animals depended on one another. “I understood that humans and animals have been dependant on one another for ages so they can survive together in a natural cycle. I was only six years old when I witnessed a sheep slaughter. My uncle wanted to show me where my favourite meal, the Faroese blood sausage, came from. It wasn’t very pleasant to see, but he showed me reality, and today I’m very grateful for that.”

---

A common argument used in whaling discussions is the clash of cultures between traditional societies, where people are close to nature and must provide for themselves, and modern societies, where people live in large modern centres far from small coastal communities. Modern societies are sometimes criticised for being detached from nature, perhaps not always aware of how the meat in their supermarkets arrived there. Mrs Sanderson says that in many cases, this is a valid point. “The simple reality is that the Faroese understand where their food comes from, and are well aware that animals must be killed to provide food.” Dr Siri Martinsen, a Norwegian veterinarian and head of Noah, an animal rights organisation, is critical of this way of thinking. “The issue of hunting marine mammals is not about urban society versus rural society. It is not even about being modern or traditional. The ability to care, to reconsider actions, and to change considerations is not limited to any culture or time.”

Dr Martinsen isn’t the only one to condemn the grindadráp. Some, Faroe Islanders included, say it is unethical and comes under animal cruelty, regardless of how ingrained it is in Faroese culture. Some, like Captain Paul Watson, founder of Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, an international non-profit, marine wildlife conservation organization who vigorously opposes the grindadráp, even compare it to murder. “We have no right to kill these creatures,” says Captain Watson. “It’s like aliens coming to Earth and slaughtering human beings because they feel superior to us.”

Does that mean that killing any type of animal is wrong? “It depends on the situation and need,” says Captain Watson. “Sometimes killing humans is justified on the grounds of self-defense or war. Whales are highly intelligent, socially complex, sentient beings, and I consider the killing of whales or dolphins as murder.”

Ms Brimheim Heinesen considers it problematic to discern between the ethicality of killing one animal over another. “If the degree of intelligence is the criteria used, is it OK to kill ‘stupid’ animals? If sociability is the criteria – aren’t mammals in general sociable animals? Aren’t all animals more or less sentient? Does that mean we should stop killing all animals?”

---

The concern of most Faroe Islanders who oppose the grindadráp has less to do with the ethics of killing whales, or any animal, and more to do with animal welfare, as well as the health effects of eating contaminated whale meat and blubber.

Faroe Islander Rúni Nielsen, a volunteer for marine conservation group Earthrace Conversation, has spoken publicly against the grindadráp. Rúni, who stopped eating grind in 2011, says even though whaling methods have improved over the last 20 years, it remains impossible to guarantee a sufficient level of animal welfare. “There are too many factors that can influence a kill, such as weather and the slope of the beaches, which can’t guarantee a swift and relatively painless death,” he says. “Some catches can last up to two hours, during which some whales are stranded in a very stressful state. This is most definitely animal cruelty.”

The World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) supports these views, saying that whaling operations can impose a degree of physical and psychological stress upon a pursued cetacean, even before any killing method is deployed.

Mrs Sanderson admits that all whale hunts can’t be executed in entirely controlled circumstances, but argues that if one can ethically accept hunting of wild animals, then one must accept that in some circumstances things won’t always go according to plan.

Captain Watson says the grindadráp would not be allowed in any abattoir in Europe. “It would be the equivalent of driving cattle into a field by traumatizing them with loud noises and prodding them with sharp sticks and then allowing civilians to stab, spear and beat them to death – and allowing children to participate.” While Captain Watson claims children participate, there is no evidence to suggest children do anything other than observe.

---

Although circumstances surrounding a slaughter, such as weather and slopes of beaches, can’t be controlled, over the last 20 years Faroe Islanders have modified hunting and killing methods in an attempt to dispel fears of animal cruelty. Whaling equipment such as spears and harpoons have been banned, and today blunt tipped blowhole hooks are used to pull the whale ashore instead of sharp ones. From 1 May 2015, a participant whose role it is to actually kill the whales (as opposed to just helping to pull them ashore) will be required by law to have a license. These licenses will be acquired through courses where district sheriffs tutor on killing tools, –methods, and –laws. In addition, a short spear, called a mønustingari, will be the only instrument permitted with which to kill whales. It’s believed that the spear shortens the amount of time it takes to kill a whale, compared to the time it takes using today’s whaling knives.

Whaling antagonists sometimes claim that the current whaling knives used don’t kill the whale instantly, but Dr Lars Walløe, Professor of Physiology at the University of Olso in Norway, refutes these claims. “Some say that the whaling knife used by the Faroese only sections the spinal cord, but does not kill the animal,” says Dr Walløe. “This view is based on the anatomy of other mammals. In all whales, the blood supply to the brain goes along the spinal cord, not through the carotid arteries, as in most other mammals. The knife used by Faroese whalers sections not only the spinal cord, but also the blood supply to the brain, ensuring an instantaneous death.”

Anti-whaling activists dismiss these hunting and killing modifications, saying they still don’t ensure an acceptable standard of animal welfare. As an example, they point to the partial blocking and irritation of the blowhole caused by using the blunt tipped hooks, which they claim hurt and panic the animals.

---

Dr Walløe echoes the view of some Faroe Islanders that support the grindadráp who say that whale species are not different from other large mammal species. “I don’t see the killing of whales as a serious issue when discussing animal welfare,” he says. “Many domestic animals, such as pigs and oxen, and wild animals, such as deer and moose, are treated much worse in parts of the world.” Kári Klettsgarð í Kongstovu, a regular Faroese hunter, offers a viewpoint representative of the way many Faroe Islanders see the issue. It is just as ‘correct’ to kill a whale in as professional a way as possible as it is to mass-produce meat, they say. “The whales have at least lived freely all their lives, whereas animals, like pigs and chickens, often live horrible lives in atrocious conditions before being slaughtered in an abattoir,” says Kári. “What is more humane?”

Pictures: Tróndur Dalsgarð

Whalers versus activists: The fight over the kings of the ocean

If you have a Facebook, Twitter or Instagram account, you’ll be lucky (or unlucky) to avoid the barrage of whale slaughter images and subsequent heated debates expected to circulate social media this summer. From June to October, marine wildlife conservation organisation Sea Shepherd will embark on Operation Grindstop 2014, a four-month campaign to the Faroe Islands with the aim of stopping the annual whale slaughter in the small North Atlantic archipelago. They’ll be using worldwide media outlets, specifically social media, to recruit support in their effort to apply pressure on the Faroe Islands, a population of 50,000, to stop their century-old tradition of slaughtering and eating whales.

Valentina Crast, vice chairman of Sea Shepherd Denmark and Danish media contact for Grindastop2014, says 300 to 500 volunteers will spend four months monitoring specific beaches and documenting, as well as preventing, any slaughter. Each volunteer will be equipped with a camera and video camera. “Social media, mainstream media, politicians and the general public will have direct access to those beaches,” says Ms Crast. “Which story will be told is up the Faroese. Will we document the brutal and barbaric killing of sentient beings, while those responsible scream of tradition and respect as their defense?”

According to Ms Crast, whale slaughters in the Faroe Islands are sometimes referred to as “Europe’s Taiji”, the European version of the Japanese dolphin drive hunt which has received widespread international criticism. Ms Crast says that the tactics used this summer will be similar to the ones Sea Shepherd have used in Taiji. (WHAT ARE THESE?) “If a hunt occurs while we are in the Faroe Islands, we plan to actively intervene”, she says. “We will do whatever it takes to prevent the killings, short of hurting somebody. No pressure in the form of a petition or costly PR campaign will change the situation. It takes more than that.”

Sea Shepherd’s history with the Faroe Islands dates back three decades, during which they have vigorously campaigned against the whale slaughter, called the grindadráp in Faroese. Led by their Captain, Paul Watson, Sea Shepherd have made six trips to the Faroe Islands, the first in 1983. During their last trip in 2011, no whales or dolphins were slaughtered during their one-month stay on the islands. Throughout these decades, Sea Shepherd’s campaigning has resulted in widespread international debate, forcing the Faroese to reassess their position on the matter. They have consistently caused controversy, both on the islands and overseas, with their reports in the mass media, and with their TV show Whale Wars: Viking Shores.

Their stories in global mass media have influenced the Faroese tourism industry, so much so that people supposedly refrain from visiting the islands because of the grindadráp (a 2013 WSPA survey, conducted in five of the Faroes’ most valuable tourist markets, showed that 37 per cent of people who said they would be interested in visiting decided not to because of the grindadráp). One way these, and others who oppose the grindadráp, voice their opinions, is by writing protest letters. The Faroese prime minister’s office receives a steady flow of protest letters on a daily basis (at one point they received 40,000 protest e-mails an hour during a whaling season in an attempt to sabotage its servers).

---

Sea Shepherd’s aim is to stop the Faroese whale slaughter, but according to some, their efforts have, ironically, had the opposite effect. Faroese Prime Minister Kaj Leo Johannesen says one reason why Faroe Islanders continue to kill pilot whales is because of the pressure Sea Shepherd have placed on the islanders. “Outside forces trying to influence us have resulted in reactions from those who support the whaling – in some cases spurring them on, instead of stopping them,” says Prime Minister Johannesen, who regularly eats grind and has participated in many slaughters.

Dr Pál Weihe, chief physician at the Department of Occupational and Public Health in the Faroese Hospital System, has advised people against consuming whale meat and blubber because of its detrimental contaminants. Dr Weihe, who himself used to eat grind and participate in hunts, says Faroe Islanders would react like any other nation when such an integral part of their national identity is under attack from the outside world. “Environmental activists from Hollywood have pushed us into a corner, telling us we should ‘Free Willy’. We immediately raise our guard and say: ‘Hell no. Nobody is going to tell us what to do,’ which is very normal human reaction.”

The problem, as Dr Weihe sees it, is that this reaction collides with common sense. “I completely agree when my fellow countrymen tell me that it is our right to kill the whales. I don’t necessarily oppose the killing. But in my profession, I have a duty to inform the public when all our research shows that eating grind can be detrimental to their health, and especially to the health of their descendants.”

Dr Weihe’s message to anti-Faroese-whaling activists is to stay away, a message he conveyed directly to Captain Watson upon receiving a phone call trying to conjure support against the grindadráp. “I told Captain Watson that it would be much easier to convince the Faroese public to stop eating grind if activists let us be, because then my message would get an opportunity to influence. As of now, some people reject our recommendations in protest against the activists. They can’t agree with our recommendations and continue to eat grind.”

Captain Watson finds this mindset illogical and silly. “It’s like they’re saying: ‘We don’t like Sea Shepherd, so out of spite towards them, we’re going to poison ourselves with contaminated whale meat and blubber’. The slaughter of whales simply has no place in the 21^st century by any persons, anywhere, for any reason. I equate the killing of a whale or dolphin to murder, because whales are highly intelligent, socially complex, sentient beings.”

---

Another controversy surrounding Sea Shepherd is their documentary-based reality TV show Whale Wars: Viking Shores, which aired on Animal Planet in 2012. It follows Sea Shepherd crewmembers in their attempt to intervene in stopping any potential grindadráp and to convince Faroe Islanders to stop killing whales. The final edit of the show caused much controversy in the Faroe Islands. Sea Shepherd were accused of creating drama for the sake of it, and portraying things out of context. “The show was ridiculed by Faroe Islanders because of its inaccuracies and constructed drama,” says Rúni Nielsen, a Faroese anti-whaler and volunteer for conservation organisation Earthrace Conservation. “Sea Shephered used tactics that misrepresented facts and stirred debate. The show’s lack of integrity has diminished any initial ounce of power or influence Sea Shepherd had on the Faroese.” Captain Watson defends the show. “Whale Wars shows are not scripted. Although the editing sometimes takes things out of context, the portrayal of Sea Shepherd actions overall were accurate.”

Sea Shepherd’s media reports and TV shows have in some cases damaged the reputation of the Faroe Islands, especially in countries where whaling isn’t accepted. Kate Sanderson, official spokeswoman for the Faroese government on whaling matters, says Sea Shepherd use tactics that misrepresent facts and stir up debate. “Since the Faroe Islands started consciously informing the world about what really happens, we have said that we will never apologise for what we do. If people don’t like it, it’s their problem.”

It is precisely the damage to the Faroe Islands’ reputation that has made some contest the grindadráp. Faroe Islander Rógvi Absalonsen, who works for the World Society for the Protection of Animals in Denmark, believes the Faroese ought to realise that a good reputation abroad is more valuable than the return and utility of the grind. “A country’s reputation is of greater economic significance than ever before. If a country is unpopular, its possibilities are diminished. When the attitude towards the grindadráp is so critical abroad, it is both naïve and dangerous to gloss over it, and hope that we can compensate with our natural scenery or with the beautiful singing of Eivør and Teitur. We can’t. The Faroese national identity is built on such a strong foundation, that it is in no way dependent on the slaughter of marine mammals.”

---

Not only do anti-whalers highlight the grindadráp as detrimental to the Faroe Islands’ reputation and tourism industry, some also point to the unsustainable status of whales in the region. There is little agreement between organisations on actual pilot whale population numbers. According to the Convention on Migratory Species, long-finned pilot whales (the most common species hunted in the Faroes) are classified under Appendix II, meaning they have an “unfavourable conservation status and would benefit significantly from international co-operation.”

However, other organisations offer different assessments. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) categorizes short and long-finned pilot whales as “data deficient”, meaning appropriate data on abundance is lacking and more information is required to make a direct or indirect assessment of its risk of extinction. A second organisation, the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO), say pilot whale numbers in the eastern North Atlantic have proven to be sustainable for a period of over 300 years, based on a survey conducted co-operatively by Norway, Iceland and the Faroe Islands in 1995. They say pilot whales are likely “one of the most abundant odontocetes [toothed whales] in the North Atlantic”, with the most reliable total estimate being 778,000 pilot whales in 1989. The International Whaling Commission and the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea conclude that with an estimated subpopulation size of 778,000 pilot whales in the eastern North Atlantic, and approximately 100,000 around the Faroes, the Faroese catch is “probably sustainable.”

---

Faroese whaling supporters point to the grind’s social, nutritional and economical importance. They highlight the importance of a system in which people from all over the country work together to provide free food for one another. They emphasize the value of pilot whaling as a means of providing food independent of the commercially-based fish export economy, which accounts for 95% of Faroese export, or the commercially-based import economy. Although grind is sold in some Faroese supermarkets and restaurants, the Faroese regard whaling as non-commercial, in that the grind is not exported, most of it is divided without the exchange of money, and no one makes a living from selling it. Because of the rugged, rocky Faroese terrain, grain and vegetables don’t grow well. The only vegetables grown are rhubarbs and potatoes. As such, meat, such as lamb, whale and beef, accounts for large portions of the Faroese diet (in 2002, whale accounted for 30 per cent of the meat produced in the Faroes). Depending on the size of the hunt and how many participate, a hunt will usually produce dozens of meals for every family – the equivalent monetary value for each average portion has been estimated at around 2,000 Danish Kroner (approximately £220). As the Faroe Islands have one of the highest rates of taxation in the world, it’s no surprise that hunts are seen as financial boosts for most families. As a whole, the Faroese see the grindadráp as a defining feature of their culture and an important source of free food in an isolated market that is heavily dependent on imports.

Opposers of the grindadráp argue that these examples of the grind’s importance are irrelevant when placed in the bigger picture. Some see the grindadráp as animal cruelty or unethical, some say the catch is unsustainable, some say the meat isn’t suitable for humans, and some, such as Rúni Nielsen and Captain Watson, point to all of the above.

---

There are as many opinions about the future of the grindadráp as there are about the tradition itself. Much depends on what, if any, political action will be taken. Sea Shepherd argue that the killing of the whales is a violation of the Bern Convention, a binding European Union treaty which aims to protect endangered vulnerable species. Although the Faroe Islands fall under the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark, they are largely an autonomous entity, giving them a great deal of political independence from Denmark. The Faroe Islands receive subsides from Denmark, but are not part of the European Union, as Denmark is. Sea Shepherd argue that even though the Faroe Islands are not subject to European regulations, Denmark, however, is, and should therefore stop providing subsidies. Denmark have replied to the request by stating that affairs regarding industry, agriculture, the environment, fishing and whaling, are subject to Faroese autonomy.

In spite of Faroe Islands’ full authority over whaling matters, Faroese Prime Minster Kaj Leo Johannesen concedes that the grindadráp does not strengthen the reputation of the Faroe Islands overseas – if anything, it hinders. “We ought to politically revise our position on matters of whaling,” he says. “I predict that the grindadráp will remain part of our modern tradition for the next 10 years, but I question whether it will in 20 to 30 years time.”

Sociologist Olga Biskopstø predicts a slow and steady decline in whaling activities. “Last time I took part in a whale catch, there were very few who knew how to properly cut and distribute the whale meat and blubber,” she says. “The older men weren’t present, and the younger ones hadn’t tried it before. Today, many young people seem indifferent or uninterested. They don’t see it as their responsibility to learn about the grindadráp, so they can pass the know-how on to their children. More and more people oppose it; they say it is unnecessary and that we don’t need grind anymore. I’m afraid this tradition is starting to slowly fade, especially as mothers don’t feed grind to their children because of its contaminants. Future generations will most likely only experience grind in a museum.” Dr Pál Weihe is more adamant. “Within the next 10 to 15, we will have stopped killing whales. It will be a part of our history – a tradition of the past.”

Others, like Mrs Sanderson, disagree, and predict instead a future for Faroese whaling. “It would be irresponsible of us to not place great value on the food resources we have in the ocean around us,” she says. “We must continue to do so, as long as we are sure that the hunt is sustainable, that we use the best hunting methods and technology available, and that we continue to monitor the health effects. If we stop, we will lose our expertise in making use of a resource that is essential for the self-sufficiency of the Faroes. One generation passed, and the know-how will be gone. We cannot afford that.”

Pictures: Tróndur Dalsgarð