1. . 1986 , . ? whaling for scientific purposes; scientific whaling ? fish stocks ?

es; scientific whaling ? fish stocks ? whale populations in the countrys waters (have increased) ? eat such large quantities of other fish that they hurt the livelihoods of fisher men ? the government is proposing to kill a set number of whales each year to ? , The question at the heart of the debate is whether we should eat whales. The debate boils down to the question of whether we should eat whales. ? the governments proposal is partly aimed at accumulating data ? International Whaling Commission ? have been studying whales for a long time ? 1% whales eat 1% of their weight ? . The gap can be explained by the fact that ? seems intent on using whale meat as a food resource ? . The whaling proposal was motivated by the fact that 1. < VERSION 1 > Proponents of scientific whaling point to the need to protect fish stocks. They say that, since the whaling ban in 1986, the whale populations in the countrys waters have significantly expanded and are eating such large quantities of other fish t hat they are posing a threat to fishermens livelihoods. Citing fishermens complaints , the government is proposing to kill a certain number of whales to study them. Still, the question at the heart of the debate now underway seems to be whether we should eat whales or not. According to media reports, the governments proposal for scientific whaling is partly aimed at accumulating data to be used when the International Whaling Commission allows commercial whaling. The US and Japan hav e been studying whales for a long time. The US claims that whales eat 1% of thei r weight while Japan says it is 5%. The gap can be explained by the fact that on e country opposes eating whale meat and the other supports it. The South Korean government seems to be regarding whales as a food resource. Man y things seem to indicate that it is following Japans example. Its plan for whalin g was driven by the fact that whale meat is commercially traded in some parts of the country. < VERSION 2 > The government says its proposal for scientific whaling is an effort to protect fish stocks. It defends killing a set number of whales each year to study them c iting fishermens complaints that whales, whose numbers have significantly increase d since the whaling ban in 1986, are putting too much pressure on fish stocks an d hurting their livelihoods. However, the ongoing debate seems to boil down to the question of whether to eat whales. Media reports indicate that the governments push for scientific whaling i s motivated by a desire to accumulate data in case the International Whaling Com mission one day lifts the whaling ban. The US and Japan have long been studying whales. Curiously, while the US says whales eat 5% of their weight, Japan says i ts 5%. The discrepancy comes from the fact that one country opposes consuming whal e meat and the other supports it.

The South Korean government seems intent on using whales as a food resource. The re are indications that it is following the example of Japan. The motivation beh ind the push for whaling seems to be the reality that whale meat is commercially bought and sold in some parts of the country.