A Whale for the Killing

No-one does nature commentaries better than Farley Mowat. And this is a story that chose him, not the other way around. In 1961 Mowat and his wife, Claire, were looking for a place to live on the South-West coast of Newfoundland. Their boat conked out just as they came to the outpost of Burgeo. They bought a small house and settled in to live there. Five years later, just after the Mowats returned from a trip to Europe and Russia, a fin whale managed to get itself landlocked in a small salt water pond near them. Fin whales are the second largest animal on earth. This one had slipped into the pond on a high tide while chasing some herring. Once the tide went out it was too big to get back to the deeper water where its mate and children show more were swimming.

Two fishermen came upon it while using the pond as a shortcut back to Burgeo. When they told some men at the fish plant about the whale these men saw it as a fine sporting opportunity. They went over to the pond with their rifles and discharged all their ammunition shooting at the whale. Then they went back to town and scrounged up more ammunition so they could repeat this fun. By the time Mowat found out about the whale, it had been shot at least 200 times. Mowat, incensed, contacted the media and the world responded with great interest. For a time the whale seemed to be safe from the human predator. Mowat then concentrated on feeding it and coming up with some way to free it from the pond.

The book is full of lots of fascinating information about whales, whale hunts, Newfoundland, Joey Smallwood and nature in general. You can't read this book and come away without feeling outrage at the way mankind treats the fellow inhabitants of this planet. Mowat estimates that there were 1 million fin whales in the world's oceans before intensive hunting began. In 1972, when he wrote this book, the best estimates were that there were 50,000 to 60,000. This reference estimates the number in 2003 was about the same.Wikpedia gives a higher number of about 100,000 but stresses that they are still an endangered species. There has been a moratorium on killing fin whales (something Mowat advocated in 1972) since 1985. However, hunting of whales is not the only reason for decline in numbers. Mowat is as passionate about overfishing as whale hunting because lack of herring and other food fish causes the higher ocean species to decline in numbers (remember this was written long before the cod moratorium was instituted). show less

In the late sixties, very little was known about whales and their demise from the whaling industry and overfishing seemed imminent. So when a fin whale became trapped by the tide in a small cove on the coast of Newfoundland, Mowat saw it as an opportunity to learn more about the whale at close quarters. He was shocked and angered to find locals using the whale for sport, shooting at it and chasing it with their speedboats. He appealed to local authorities for help and getting little response, went to the media and Canadian government. The small community he lived in split sides as some saw his work advocating for the whale as meddlesome, whereas others welcomed the attention the whale brought their small village. Efforts to free the show more whale had to wait for the next highest tide- it would have been a month at best, but the story of the whale covers only ten days. Mowat struggled to find means to feed the whale, and protect it from people -whether they were just curious, bored or outright cruel mattered little- in the end they did the whale no good.

It gets set up slowly, introducing the reader to the history of whaling in Newfoundland (and around the world) as well as the location. Mowat had only been in this remote fishing community for five years, seeking a quiet place to live far from "modern society" (he rants a lot against industrialization and modern technology, seems to hate the telephone in particular). Unfortunately his actions in favor of the whale brought all kinds of conflict and ill-feeling. In parts the book is almost more a study of human nature (how people responded to the whale's presence and each other's involvement in its plight) than it is about the whale itself. There are some detailed descriptions of its sheer size, calm movements and eerie sounds. Also details on its natural feeding methods (which could hardly be met) and how another fin whale (probably its mate) stayed just outside the inlet to the cove constantly until the whale died. It's a frustrating story to read, because so little could be done, and by the time scientists became interested in the whale it was too late for them to arrive and learn anything. But the book did have an impact on early whale conservation efforts.

more at the "a href="http://dogeardiary.blogspot.com/2015/08/a-whale-for-killing.html">Dogear Diary show less

Spoiler warning: my review contains spoilers of the book.

I have rated Farley Mowat's A Whale for the Killing 3 out of 5 stars, and I believe that this is a considerably generous rating. The point about the book that enabled me to give it 3 stars is that the book is interesting from the standpoints of history and animal rights. A Whale for the Killing focuses on a unique moment in Newfoundland history, and chronicles some history of Newfoundland and the whaling industry at the beginning. In addition, the book is a part of the "save the whales" movement that has contributed to the development of matters concerned with animal rights. So, the book is worth reading for those who have interests in history and animal rights.

The rest of this show more critical review focuses on what I find detracts from the value of the book. I found that the most difficult part about reading this book to completion is that Mowat expresses a few somewhat extreme views and beats the reader over the head with them. One of these views is his political view of Joseph Smallwood's government and the attempted industrialization of Newfoundland. Mowat's political view becomes a bit extreme when he shuns new technology (but he seems to have no problems with telephones and motor boats...). And, he proceeds to beat the reader over the head with this view as the book is littered with tiny comments, like descriptions of how the shooters of the whale have powerboats and are workers in office buildings/factories. New technology is not the enemy. Even though some new technology may harm natural world, it can also be used to save the natural world. However, controversial views do not necessarily detract from the literary value of books, but the way that he frequently makes little anti-technology comments throughout the book sounds immature and annoying to this reader.

Another of Mowat's rather controversial views is his animal rights view that whales deserve protection from the human race because they are the smartest creatures on the planet. Again, this review does not detract value from Mowat's book because I disagree with his views, but because his argument is thoroughly flawed and the book itself even shows these flaws. If whales are so smart, then why didn't Moby Joe just swim out of the pond the way she got in? And many similar questions may be asked while reading the book while Mowat tries to convince the reader that whales have a much more intelligence than humans in lines such as "As to what [whales] have to say to each other, we have only the faintest of clues. Still, we can be reasonably confident that they are not just talking for the sake of hearing the sound of their own voices. They seem far too intelligent for that" (p. 158).

I am not opposed to the development of animal rights, nor do I believe that animals are completely devoid of intelligence. Though, the extreme position of Mowat's argument is in stating that whales are the *most* intelligent creatures on the planet, and for *this* reason they are deserving of better moral considerations than they are currently granted. It is an old argument now to say that animals are undeserving of moral consideration because of their apparent lesser intelligence, and Mowat's book is an old book. However, this is a critical review and is directed at the modern reader (and nevertheless there are old books that make strong arguments despite their time period). I find that Paola Cavalieri's book The Animal Question: Why Nonhuman Animals Deserve Human Rights makes a much more compelling argument in favour of the development of animal rights: we, humans, grant moral consideration to members of our own species who are mentally limited, vegetative, and not even born yet (as seen in debates about abortion), but few of us grant such moral consideration to animals whether they are mentally limited or not, and this may be explained by the concept of speciesism. Cavalieri proceeds to provide evidence in support of her argument in her book, whereas Mowat tends to provide considerable amounts of counter-evidence to his argument in his book; this leaves the reader wondering why Mowat bothers to hold such an extreme opinion, when a more moderate opinion (like Cavalieri's) could equally satisfy an animal rights agenda without the evidence in the book contradicting such an opinion as well.

Lastly, Mowat ends his book on a bit of an extreme note, deeming the whole matter with the whale as a total failure: "I was weeping... weeping not just for the whale that died, but because the fragile link between her race and mine was severed. I wept, because I know that this fleeting opportunity to bridge, no matter how tenuously, the ever-widening chasm that is isolating mankind from the totality of life, had perished in a water of human stupidity and ignorance -- some part of which was mine" (pp. 231 & 232). Contrary to how Mowat felt at the time of writing this book, mankind's understanding of whales and connection to whales has improved significantly (and partly thanks to new technology). Although Mowat partially blames himself for the death of the whale, through his extremity, he also gives himself no credit in being a major contributor to the development of the animal rights movement. So, the end of the book is unnecessarily full of doom and gloom while the rest of it is riddled with thoughts of his other extreme views, but the book still has considerable merit in history and the development of animal rights; for these reasons A Whale for the Killing gets 3 out of 5 stars from me. show less

Farley Mowat had been living in this isolated area of Newfoundland for 5 years when a whale became trapped and couldn't get back out to sea. It was the late 1960s. Some of the local people took to shooting the stranded, helpless whale for fun, while Mowat tried to stop them and free the whale, making enemies in his "new" community as he does so. He contacted various governments and media to get the word out for help.

Mowat starts by describing whales and whale behavior, and talks about the decreasing numbers of all species of whales before he gets to this personal story. The book was written in 1972. I suspect there is much more known about whale behaviour now than at the time the book was written. Of course, the statistics for the show more numbers of whales would be completely different now as well - I suspect they are worse off now. It's a heartwrenching true story, and well worth the read, even if the stats are out of date. show less

Factual, beautifully written, and one of the most heartrending books I have ever read.

powerful depiction of life, people and places in the remote part of the Canadian East, and most especially, how despicable people can be

An incredible tale from Mowat with a lot going on. This book marks a turning point in western attitudes towards whales and whaling, and remains a touchstone for Sea Shepherd's conservation work around the globe. However, there's also some other interesting themes of the consequences of economic growth and small town mindedness, which make this a classic read.