www.eia-international.org

Global chemical pollution and the hunting ofwhales, dolphins and porpoises

BRIEFING

Introduction

Below: Dolphinsoften carry highlevels of chemicalpollutants.

AcknowledgementsWritten and edited by Clare Perry andDr. Ezra Clark. Additional editing byMary Rice, Allan Thornton andJennifer Lonsdale. Design byJoaquim Pereira.

The support of the Homeland Foundationfor EIA’s cetacean campaign is gratefullyacknowledged.

The Environmental Investigation Agency(EIA) is an independent, international campaigning organisation committed to investigating and exposing environmentalcrime. Since 1984, EIA has used pioneeringinvestigative techniques all over the world toexpose the impact of environmental crimeand to seek lasting solutions. EIA’s aims areto:

• Stop illegal trade in endangered species

• Gain lasting protection for species under threat

• Protect the shared environment of manand wildlife

www.eia-international.org

IntroductionThe pollution of the world’s environmentpresents an increasing threat to marine speciesand to humans. While international agreementsare being negotiated to reduce or eliminatesome of the more notorious chemicals, scientificresearch is showing that newer-generationchemicals may pose an even greater threat tothe marine environment.

The widespread global contamination bychemicals that are now banned or restrictedand their continued impact on wildlife is a starkwarning that there is no quick fix to theproblem of global pollution, and thatimmediate and sustained action is needed atnational, regional and international levels.

Cetaceans, particularly toothed cetaceans (manywhales and all dolphins and porpoises), aresignificantly at risk from pollution as they arelong-lived and slow breeding animals in theupper levels of the food web. Cetacean species

worldwide carry a variety of contaminants intheir tissues, some in extremely highconcentrations. These contaminants, present inthe meat, blubber and organs, have seriousassociated health risks for the people whoconsume cetacean products.

As the body responsible for the conservationand management of cetaceans, the InternationalWhaling Commission (IWC) has a clearmandate to address this issue. The IWC’s workto study and address the effects ofcontaminants in cetaceans must be substantiallyincreased in order to identify and implementmitigating measures to protect cetaceans andthe people that consume cetacean products.

Clare Perry,Cetacean Campaign Manager, EIAJuly 2004

Front cover main photo: © Gary Taylor. Inserts: from left to right © Pierre Gleizes/EIA, © Ezra Clark/EIA, © David Sims/EIA

© B

ruce McC

oubrey

Some chemicals of concern

1

PCBs and pesticidesOrganochlorines such as PCBs (polychlorinatedbiphenyls) and many pesticides are man-madechemicals which are extremely persistent,tending to bioaccumulate in fatty tissues. Usedin electrical equipment and the manufacture ofmany materials since the 1930’s, PCBs havebecome widely distributed in the marineenvironment,12 and can reach concentrations ofup to 70 000 times higher in marine mammalsthan the background environmental levels.13

DDT has been widely used as a pesticide since1939, and although its use was banned in manyWestern countries by the mid 1970s, it is stillused in some developing countries for pest anddisease control.14

Organochlorines can cause immuno-suppression, endocrine disruption, reproductivefailure and developmental problems, as well ascancer.15,16 Beluga whales in the St Laurenceestuary have extremely high contaminant loadsdue to exposure to industrial pollutantsincluding organochlorines and the populationsuffers from a high rate of cancer, accountingfor 40% of reported cancer cases in cetaceansworldwide.17

Exposure to PCBs in humans has been found toincrease rates of cancers, disrupt functioning ofthe immune and endocrine systems and tocause irreversible neurological damage tohuman foetuses.18-21

Brominated flame retardantsLevels of newer-generation chemicals such aspolybrominated flame retardants are generallyrising in the environment and there is a currenttrend of increasing global production for someof these chemicals.22 The toxic properties offlame retardant chemicals are similar to PCBsand are known to bioaccumulate and causethyroid hormone disruption, neurodevelop-mental defects and in some cases cancer inanimals. Concentrations of these chemicals inthe blubber of harbour seals and beluga whalesin Canada have increased significantly over thelast decade23 and high levels have also beenfound in long-finned pilot whales which arehunted in the Faroe Islands.24 Little is knownabout the toxicological effects of thesechemicals on humans.25

Some chemicals ofconcern

MercuryMercury is highly toxic and persistent. Itbioaccumulates in marine organisms and can betransformed into methylmercury by the actionof bacteria. Methylmercury is an organic formwhich is, in turn, more toxic and more readilybioaccumulated into internal organs,particularly the liver and muscle tissues.1

Mercury results from both natural andanthropogenic release into the environment, thebulk of which comes from the combustion offossil fuels and waste incineration. Industrialprocesses and manufactured goods such asthermometers, dental fillings and fluorescentlights also make a significant contribution.2

High levels of mercury may present asignificant contributory factor to cetaceanmortality, particularly in animals weakened bydisease and therefore less able to detoxifyorganic mercury as efficiently as healthyanimals.3 In a study of stranded dead porpoisesoff the coast of England and Wales, scientistsfound higher levels of methylmercury in thelivers of those that had died from infectiousdiseases than in those that had died fromphysical trauma.4 Studies have also linked liverabnormalities in bottlenose dolphins withchronic accumulation of mercury.5

Methylmercury exposure in humans can causeirreversible neurological damage. Symptomscan include impaired vision, speech andhearing, loss of coordination, reproductivedisorders, paralysis and cerebral palsy. Severecases may result in coma or death.6-8 Thehuman foetus has an increased susceptibility tomethylmercury toxicity, as it readily crosses theplacenta and even small increases in maternalexposure have been associated with increasedneo-natal neurological impairment.9 A sevenyear study on 917 children born in the FaroeIslands found significant delays in neurologicaldevelopment in children whose mothers whohad been exposed to methylmercury duringpregnancy. The study also detected widespreadeffects on brain function at exposure levels thatare currently considered safe.10 Follow upstudies that were conducted over thesubsequent seven years were reported in 2004and indicated that the harmful effects of pre-natal exposure to methylmercury may beirreversible. The study suggested that post-natalexposure to methylmercury can also causechildren to suffer developmental problems, andthat disruption is exacerbated by continuedconsumption of mercury-containing products.11

“Methyl-mercury

exposure inhumans

can causeirreversible

neurologicaldamage”.

Global action

2

National healthwarningsJapan, Norway, Iceland and the Faroe Islandshave all issued pollution-related healthwarnings specifically regarding theconsumption of whale products. The Faroes’advice recognises the threat to all consumers,while the advice from Japan, Norway andIceland is directed only to pregnant andbreastfeeding women. Japan’s advice iswoefully inadequate. It ignores many speciesthat are available on the market whichtypically carry very high pollutant burdens.For example, Dall’s porpoises, of which asmany as 18 000 are caught in Japan’s coastalwaters each year, are not included.32

Global actionThe Convention on Long-range TransboundaryAir Pollution (LRTAP) was the firstinternational agreement to recognise theenvironmental and health problems caused bythe flow of air pollutants across borders. It wassigned in 1979 and now has 43 Parties amongthe 55 UN ECE (Economic Commission forEurope) member states. Protocols on persistentorganic pollutants (POPs) and heavy metalswere adopted and signed in June 1998.27

In 2003 the Governing Council of the UnitedNations Environment Programme (UNEP)concluded that there was “…sufficient evidenceof significant global adverse impacts frommercury to warrant further international actionto reduce the risks to humans and wildlifefrom the release of mercury to theenvironment.” It further stated that allcountries should identify exposed populationsand ecosystems, and has initiated a series ofregional awareness raising workshops under anew UNEP Mercury Programme.28

Consideration will be given to the prospect ofa global protocol on mercury (as well as otherpersistent heavy metals such as cadmium andlead) when the Council meets in 2005.29

On 17th May 2004, the Stockholm Conventionon POPs entered into force after Francebecame the 50th nation to ratify. Japan,Norway and Iceland are all Parties to theConvention. Twelve classes of chemicals,including PCBs, are initially targeted for globalphase-out, and the addition of new chemicalswill be considered next year.30

Arctic IssuesA great deal of attention has focused on thestate of the Arctic environment with respect topollution. In 1991, the Arctic Monitoring andAssessment Programme (AMAP) wasestablished to advise the governments of theeight Arctic countries on matters relating tothreats to the Arctic region from pollution andassociated issues, including human health. TheArctic is contaminated by POPs, metals andradionuclides, which biomagnify in Arctic foodwebs. This results in the contamination oftraditional foods in the Arctic, particularlymarine mammals and birds, at levels which areoften in excess of contaminant levels in mid-latitudes. The highest exposure to some POPsand mercury are faced by Inuit populations inGreenland and Canada. Although AMAPrecommends that Arctic people continue to eattraditional foods, it also advises thedevelopment of dietary advice for girls, womenof child-bearing age and pregnant women topromote the use of less contaminated foods.31

JapanFollowing an investigation in 2001, Japan’sMinistry of Health, Labour and Welfare(JMHLW) released public health adviceregarding the consumption of whale anddolphin products for the first time in June2003. Rather than implement a thoroughinvestigation to determine consumptionlevels in different regions, the governmentanalysis assumed the annual consumptionof cetacean products was evenly spreadthroughout the entire Japanesepopulation, although it is commonknowledge that many Japanese peoplerarely or never eat whale products. Basedon this error it was thus determined thatthere is little or no risk to the Japanesepopulation.33

The specific recommendations are thatthose who are pregnant, or think they maybe pregnant, should limit consumption ofbottlenose dolphin to no more than asingle portion of 60 to 80g in a two monthperiod and Baird's beaked whale, short-finned pilot whale, sperm whale and shark(muscle) to no more than a single portionof 60 to 80g in a week.34

“Japan’sadvice ...ignoresmanyspecies thatare availableon themarketwhichtypicallycarry veryhighpollutantlevels”.

© M

ia Strickland/EIA

National health warnings

3

IcelandOn 13 October 2003, Iceland’s Directorateof Health advised pregnant andbreastfeeding women to limit theirconsumption of minke whale meat to twicea week or less, due to high levels ofmercury and PCBs.36

NorwayFollowing chemical analyses of whalescaught in the 2003 commercial hunt ofNorth Atlantic minke whales, Norway’sfood authority (SNT) recommended thatpregnant and breastfeeding women refrainfrom eating whale meat as it may containhigh doses of mercury.35

FaroesAround 1000-1500 long-finned pilot whalesand other dolphins are killed each year inthe Faroe Islands and distributed aroundthe island for human consumption. Whalemeat consumed in the Faroes typicallycontains mercury at levels of around1.6ppm (parts per million) and blubber ofpilot whales contains high levels of PCBs.37

In 1989 the health authoritiesrecommended that pilot whales should notbe eaten for dinner more than once everytwo weeks, that no more than 100-200gblubber should be eaten on a monthlybasis and that pregnant women should eat"much less" of these items.38 Therecommendations were revised by thegovernment in 1998: Adults should refrainfrom having more than one or two mealsof whale meat or blubber per month. Toprotect unborn children, girls and womenshould not eat blubber at all until theyhave given birth to their children. Womenwho intend to get pregnant within a threemonth period, women who are pregnant,or those who are breastfeeding, shouldabstain from eating pilot whale meat.Livers and kidneys of whale should not beeaten at all.

The reduction in consumption of pilotwhale in response to the initial healthadvisory has resulted in a considerabledecline in levels of mercury in Faroeseadults over the last nine years. Similardeclines have not been seen in PCBlevels, which is attributed to the greaterpersistence of these chemicals.39

© D

ave Currey/E

IA

© D

ave Currey/E

IA©

Polluted cetacean products in Japan

4

Right:This canned whalestew purchased inShizuoka contained6.9ppm mercury,more than 17 timeshigher than theJapanesegovernment limits.

Polluted cetaceanproducts in JapanThe JMHLW sets provisional regulatory limitsfor seafood in the Food Sanitation Law at0.4ppm mercury, 0.3ppm methylmercury and0.5ppm PCBs.40 The meat of toothed cetaceanssold in Japan almost always exceeds theprovisions for mercury and methylmercury,while the blubber products typically exceed thePCBs limit. As dolphins and porpoises are oftensold falsely as ‘whale’, consumers are unable todetermine which species they are purchasing.41

The Government of Japan also sets aprovisional tolerable weekly intake (PTWI) of170 micrograms methylmercury in a 50kgperson per week.42 Chemical analysis ofbottlenose dolphin meat purchased in Okayamain 2001 by EIA revealed a methylmercury levelof 10.88ppm. Consumption of just 16g of thisproduct would exceed one 50kg person’s ‘safe’weekly intake limit for methylmercury. Morealarming is the fact that the Japanese PTWI ismore than two times higher than the levelrecently recommended by the Joint Food andAgricultural Organisation (FAO)/World HealthOrganisation (WHO) Expert Committee onFood Additives.43 It is clear that the onlyrealistic way to protect consumer health inJapan is to ban outright the sale of all toothedcetacean products.

EIA investigationsIndependent analysis of 58 products purchasedby EIA from Japanese supermarkets during theperiod March 2001 to February 2003 detected,on average, levels of mercury that were morethan five times higher than the maximum limitset by Japanese law. One sample had aconcentration of mercury more than 17 timeshigher than the legal limit.44

A further analysis of 46 products purchasedmainly in Fukuoka in October 2003 revealedaverage mercury concentrations of 0.97ppmand average methylmercury levels of 0.48ppm.More than half of the products exceeded theJapanese permitted levels for mercury and 46%

of the products exceeded the methylmercurylimit of 0.3ppm.

In February 2004, a range of products waspurchased through the internet from theJapanese company Ishinomaki Suisan andanalysed in Japan for contaminants. Five whaleproducts labelled as minke had relatively lowlevels of pollutants. However, three samples ofcanned whale yamatoni (stew) contained anaverage of 1.10ppm mercury and 0.67ppmmethylmercury – some 2.75 times higher thangovernment limits for mercury and more thantwice as high as the limit for methylmercury. Aprevious analysis of the same canned productpurchased in 2003 in Shizuoka contained6.90ppm mercury and 3.10ppm methylmercury.The product is advertised on the manufacturer’swebsite with the following text: “Whale meat isa very precious source of protein for peoplewho have allergies. It has many nutrients whichkeep body and mind healthy – so make sureyou eat plenty of it!”45

Another product from the same company,‘whale curry’, one of the company’s toprecommendations, also contained high levels ofmercury (1.51ppm mercury and 1.21ppmmethylmercury). Ishinomaki Suisan productsare distributed throughout Japan by largewholesalers and are found in majorsupermarkets, such as Ito-Yokado and itssubsidiary stores, York-Benimaru.

According to the Government of Japan’sInstitute of Cetacean Research (ICR) report onJapan’s North Pacific ‘scientific’ whaling, theproblem of contaminants is not just restrictedto toothed small cetaceans. The average PCBlevel in the blubber of 17 North Pacific minkewhales was 1.8ppm, more than three timeshigher than Japan’s provisional limit of0.5ppm. Sperm whales revealed similar levels ofPCB polluted blubber, but also had high levelsof mercury in their muscle; every animal testedcontained more than double the provisionallimit of 0.4ppm.46 The mercury level in thesperm whales was high enough for the FisheriesAgency of Japan to prevent the distribution ofsperm whales in the market. However inAugust 2003, a Japanese newspaper reportedthat the ICR was now considering selling thesperm whale meat.47

The Government of Japan continues to ignorethe fact that certain Japanese communities areat risk of serious health effects due to theconsumption of cetacean products. Many ofthese communities are in coastal regions, andare likely to consume high levels of otherseafood in addition to whales and dolphins,adding to the overall burden of mercury andother toxins.

© E

zra Clark/E

IA

Recommendations

5

Recommendations• All countries where cetacean products are

consumed should institute comprehensivestudies to determine consumptionlevels of, and pollution levels in, all cetaceanproducts.

• The Government of Japan must prohibit thecommercial distribution and sale of toothedcetacean products.

• The Government of Japan must issue healthwarnings to alert the Japanese public,especially those most vulnerable – womenwho are pregnant, nursing or plan to becomepregnant, and children – to refrain fromconsuming whale, dolphin or porpoiseproducts.

• Commercial retail outlets in Japan shouldcease selling cetacean products in their stores.

• IWC member governments should fully fundPollution 2000+ as an initial step in thedevelopment of a long-term programme ofnon-lethal, interdisciplinary research to

monitor and mitigate the impact of chemicalpollutants on cetaceans.

• The IWC should promote bilateralcooperation and exchange of informationwith international initiatives that addresspollution issues.

• All member countries should ratify theStockholm Convention on Persistent OrganicPollutants (POPs) and the protocols on POPsand heavy metals in the UNECE Convention onLong-range Transboundary Air Pollution(LRTAP), and support the UNEP MercuryProgramme.

• All member governments should strengthennational efforts to control the production,use, and emissions to the environment ofPOPs and heavy metals. IWC member nationsare urged to support a prohibition on theproduction and sale of mercury and productscontaining mercury.

© G

ill Sinclair

References1. UNEP, 2002. Global Mercury Assessment. Issued by UNEP Chemicals

Geneva, Switzerland, December 2002.2. Law, R.J. 1996. Metals in marine mammals. In: Environmental

Contaminants in Wildlife: Interpreting tissue concentrations. Beyer, W. N,Heinz, G.H.; Redmon-Norwood, A.W., eds., CRC Press, Inc. SETAC SpecialPublications Series. 464 pp.

3. R. Dietz et al. 1990. Organic mercury in Greenland birds and mammals.Sci.Total Environ. 95:41-51.

4. P.M. Bennett et al. 2001. Exposure to heavy metals and infectious diseasemortality in harbour porpoises from England and Wales. Environ Pollut112:33-40.

5. A.J. Rawson et al. 1992. Lymphangiomyomatosis in the Atlantic bottlenosed dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). Journal of wildlife diseases28(2):323-325.

6. Rice, D.C. 2001. Methods and Ratrionale for Derivation of a ReferenceDose for Methylmercury by the US EPA. Proceedings of the Children’sEnvironmental Health- Developing a Framework” California EPA.

7. MacKenzie, D. 1998. “When too much fish makes men infertile”. NewScientist, 30 May 1998 p25.

8. Stefanos, N.K. & R.H. Goldman. 2002. Mercury Exposure: CurrentConcepts, Contraversies, and a Clinic’s Experience. JOEM 44(2).

9. U.P. Steuerwald et al. 2000. Maternal seafood diet, methylmercuryexposure, and neonatal neurological function. J Pediatr 136:599-605.

10. P. Grandjean et al. 1997. Cognitive Deficit in 7-Year-Old Children withPrenatal Exposure to Methylmercury. Neurotoxicology and Teratology19(6):417-428.

11. K. Murata et al. 2004. Delayed brainstem auditory evoked potentiallatencies in 14-year-old children exposed to methylmercury. The Journal ofPediatrics, February 2004. p177-183.

12. Clark R.B. 1986. Marine pollution. Third Edition. Clarendon Press, Oxford172pp.

13. L. Ritter et al. 1995. Assessment Report on DDT, Aldrin, Dieldrin, Endrin,Chlordane, Heptachlor, Hexachlorobenzene, Mirex, Toxaphene,Polychlorinated Biphenyls, Dioxins and Furans. December 1995.

14. Mallanby, K. 1992. The DDT story. British Crop Protection Council,Farnham, 113pp.

15. Clark, 1986 ibid.16. M. Watanabe et al. 2000. Polychlorinated biphenyls, organochlorine

pesticides, tris (4-chlorophenyl) methane, and tris(4-chlorophenyl) methanolin livers of small cetaceans stranded along Florida coastal waters, USA.Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 19, (6), pp 1566-1574.

17. D. Martineau et al. 1999. Cancer in beluga whales from the St LaurenceEstuary, Quebec, Canada: A potential biomarker of environmentalcontamination. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. (Special Issue 1) 349-265.

18. B.L. Johnson et al., 1999. Public Health Implications of Exposure toPolychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). Agency for Toxic Substances and DiseaseRegistry. Online at www.atsdr.cdc.gov.

19. P. Medola et al. 1997. Consumption of PCB-contaminated Freshwater Fishand Shortened Menstrual Cycle Length. American Journal of Epidemiology,145(11):955.

20. Carpenter, D. O., 1998. Polychlorinated Biphenyls and Human Health.International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health,11(4):291-303.

21. Jacobson, J.L. and Jacobson, S.W. 1996. Intellectual Impairment in ChildrenExposed to Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Utero. New England Journal ofMedicine, 335(11):783-789.

22. M.G. Ikonomou et al..2002. Exponential increases in the brominated flameretardants, polybrominated diphenyl ethers in the Canadian Arctic from1981 to 2000. Environ. Sci. Technol. 36(9):1886-1892.

23. R.J. Law et al.. 2003. Levels and trends of polybrominated dephenylethersand other brominated flame retardants in wildlife. EnvironmentInternational 29(6) 757-770.

24. G. Lindström et al., 1999. Identification of 19 brominated diphenylethers(PBDEs) in Long-Finned Pilot Whale (Globicephala melas) from theAtlantic. Arch. of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology,36:355-363.

25. McDonald, T.A. 2002. A perspective on the potential health risks ofPBDEs. Chemosphere, 46, 745-755.

26. Bjorndal, K.A. 1994. Ingestion of marine debris by juvenile sea-turtles incoastal Florida habitats. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 28(3), 154-158.

27. LRTAP http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap.28. UNEP, 2003. Decision GC 22/4 V February 2003.29. UNEP Mercury Programme

http://www.chem.unep.ch/mercury/mercury%20programme.htm.30. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants

http://www.pops.int/.31. AMAP, 2003. AMAP Assessment 2002: Human Health in the Arctic. Arctic

Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway. xiv+137pp. The eight Arctic countries are Canada, Denmark/Greenland,Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States

32. Japan Progress Report on Cetacean Research SC/50/ProgRep./Japan,presented to the International Whaling Commission (IWC) ScientificCommittee in 1998.

33. The result from the investigation about the actual condition of PCB andmercury in foods made from whales. 16th January 2003.www.mhlw.go.jp/houdou/2003/01/h0116-4.html. (Japanese language).

34. Important Guidelines relating to the consumption of seafood containingmercury. June 3rd 2003. Pharmaceutical, Food Safety InquiriesCommission. Joint Committee of Dairy and Seafood, Toxicology Division.(Japanese language).

35. www.mattilsynet.no Gravide og ammende bør ikke spise hvalkjøtt.Publisert: 13.05.2003 Sist oppdatert: 25.02.2004.

36. www.rf.is/media/frettir/hg.pdf, www.landlaeknir.is.37. AMAP, 2003, ibid.38. P. Weihe et al. 1996. Health implications for Faroe Islanders of heavy

metals and PCBs from pilot whales. The Science of the Total Environment186:141-148.

39. AMAP, 2003, ibid.40. JETRO, 2004. Specifications and Standards for Foods, Food Additives, etc.

Under The Food Sanitation Law. April 2004.41. The facts behind Japan’s whale, dolphin and porpoise hunting. 2002.

Environmental Investigation Agency report. London. 6pp.42. Provisional Tolerable Weekly Intake (PTWI) for methylmercury is 170µg per

50kg per week. Pers comm. K Haraguchi, Daiichi College ofPharmaceutical Sciences, Fukuoka, Japan.

43. Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. 10-19 June 2003,Sixty-first meeting.

44. Mercury Rising, the sale of polluted whale, dolphin and porpoise meat inJapan. 2003. Environmental Investigation Agency report. London. 12pp.

45. Ishinomaki Suisan products on sale athttp://www.shunsenichiba.com/kinoya/main.html (Japanese language).

46. Photographs from JARPN II Japan’s Whale Research Program in theWestern North Pacific. The Institute of Cetacean Research and NationalResearch Institute of Far Seas Fisheries. IWC/55/23.

47. Safety First Press Release, 5th September 2003. We oppose to anexamination about a sale of sperm whale lean meat which exceed safetylimit of mercury[SIC]. http://www.safetyfirst.gr.jp/english/.

EIA UK62-63 Upper Street

London N1 0NYUnited Kingdom

ukinfo@eia-international.orgTel +44 (0)20 7354 7960Fax +44 (0)20 7354 7961

EIA USP.O. Box 53343Washington DC 20009United States of Americausinfo@eia-international.orgTel +1 202 483 6621Fax +1 202 986 8626

www.eia-international.org

environmental investigation agency

EIA’s chemical analyses were carried out at the Daiichi College of Pharmaceutical Sciences in Fukuoka, Japan.