Sir

I hold no brief for Greenpeace, but those of us who monitor these things know that, far from taking action against the stricken whaling ship, as Dan Goodman asserts, the Greenpeace vessel, which happened to be nearby, offered assistance — which was refused — by both radio and signal flags (Nature 397, 290; 290 1999).

Rather than disregarding the advice of its scientific committee, as Goodman asserts, the International Whaling Commission formally accepted it, but has delayed implementation until the whaling nations agree to precautionary measures including independent international inspection and monitoring. What Goodman may find hard to accept is that scientific advice on possible safe catch quotas was nearly all based on research funded by environmental and animal welfare groups, including Greenpeace!

Some organizations in Japan apparently want to resolve the whaling issue. But the Japanese Institute of Cetacean Research, of which Goodman is a member, has made a mockery of its “scientific whaling programme” by resuming, more than half way through the summer season, the plan to catch the originally decided number of minke whales, despite the fact that this plan was said to have been drawn up to cover all of the designated “sampling” areas and seasons.