How do you get taken seriously as a conservation activist?

When writing a blog or a comment on social media, it is easy to get a little rigid in one's stand on an issue or one's view on a group or person. Once our mind is made up, it tends to be difficult for us to change it, or admit that someone we don't like actually did something good.

People who don't agree with you won't change their mind, unless you have an open mind, are able to see where they are coming from and are able to specifically explain, why you disagree with them. While I can certainly see the passion behind someone opposing, for example OCEARCH, I question whether you can convince someone to see things your way, by just wholesale condemning everything they do. The only people you convince that way, are the ones already agreeing with you.

If you speak out against specific things instead, like (OCEARCH) lifting sharks out of the water, the fin damage their tags cause (pictured below) etc. If you explain how those things could be done better,  I think you'll have a much better chance to get them to change. Even if they themselves won't change, maybe you'll convince some of their supporters or sponsors and they can make them change.

source

A great example for doing it right is DaShark. He is certainly a guy with an opinion on things. His view on groups like Sea Shepherd tend to be mixed to say the least. In his own words " I harbor, to state it mildly, mixed feelings" What makes him different is the fact that he is not rigid in his thinking, he gives credit, when he thinks someone deserves credit, just like he does here and here. 

Admittedly, it is not easy to have and open mind, and sometimes it hurts to acknowledge that someone is doing something good. DaShark acknowledges that this way "Mark this day in your calender! I'm gonna say something positive about the SSCS! (And before you ask - yes it did hurt. But what is fair is fair.)"

So what does keeping and open mind and working with people instead of against them get you? Well in DaSharks case, a national park! He is none other than the guy who was instrumental in creating the Shark Reef Marine Reserve in Fiji, a project that saw the number of fish species present go from around 260 to over 460 in a 10 year span!
 

DaShark with his "girls" in the "SRMR"

Of course it was not just his open mind that got this project accomplished. There was a lot of hard work instead of "slacktivism" involved. In other words, if you really want to change something, you have to do more than just have an opinion and open mind. You have to get off your butt and actually do something.   

You can follow DaShark's blog here.

Cheers,
Martin Graf
CEO Shark Diver 

About Shark Diver. As a global leader in commercial shark diving and conservation initiatives Shark Diver has spent the past decade engaged for sharks around the world. Our blog highlights all aspects of both of these dynamic and shifting worlds. You can reach us directly at staff@sharkdiver.com.

Are we to blame for shark attacks?

Today, I read this piece in the Huff Post. Paul Watson of sea shepherd infamy is explaining in staggering scientific fashion (sharkasm intended), why the number of shark attacks seems to be increasing. Watson is saying:

"Shark attacks are on the rise and the reason for this is entirely the fault of humanity." 

To start with, we are diminishing bio-diversity in the ocean. Overfishing has removed 90% of the fish from the sea since 1950. Every single commercial fishery is in a state of decline. This is not just bad news for humans who eat fish, but it is very bad news for sharks, orcas, whales, seals and dolphins who have no choice but to eat fish. In other words, starvation is a very big motivation for opportunistic attacks.

Hmm, what!? Because there are not enough fish, sharks are attacking humans? Wait, didn't I hear that the seal populations are increasing and GWS as well as Orcas eat seals? 

source

While I was contemplating on how to disseminate and respond to this stellar piece of fiction writing, I saw that DaShark beat me to it. He is doing it much more eloquently than I ever could here

In his colorful way, DaShark reasons: What a load of horseshit - predator/prey cycles anybody? And are we only decimating the prey - or is it not rather so that we have disproportionally targeted predator populations among which the Sharks? 

The truth is that there is not one single documented case of more Shark attacks occurring because of overfishing!

In fact, when it comes to some GWS populations, we may be experiencing the exact opposite! Having protected the Pinnipeds, we are now seeing more GWS in California, the East Coast of the USA and also Western Australia! And there are authoritative voices claiming that the Tiger Shark population of Hawaii may be increasing owing to the protection of Sea Turtles!

That is only part of his blog. You can read the rest of what he has to say here

Once again, excellent insight DaShark!

Cheers,
Martin Graf
CEO Shark Diver

About Shark Diver. As a global leader in commercial shark diving and conservation initiatives Shark Diver has spent the past decade engaged for sharks around the world. Our blog highlights all aspects of both of these dynamic and shifting worlds. You can reach us directly at staff@sharkdiver.com.

S.A Shark Nets - Wagging The Conservation Dog - And Wrong Sounding Muppets

Pizza box tops and lipstick...now THAT'S conservation!

Word on the street is that Shark Angels, those rough riding take-no-prissiness step children of Sea Shepherd, have managed to get the shark nets in  Aliwal Shoal Marine Protected Area taken down.

Or at least they will come down sometime in the future, and when they do you can thank the Shark Angels for it:

"Thanks in part to the hard work from several shark angels for almost four years, KZN Sharks Board has buckled under the pressure and has recommended the removal of four gill nets in the Aliwal Shoal Marine Protected Area within the next year. This includes nets at both Scottburgh and Park Rynie and is a monumental step towards the abandonment of shark nets throughout the country – and hopefully at some point, the globe. The announcement, which came at the quarterly meeting of the Aliwal Shoal Forum in KwaZulu Natal, was made quietly and without fanfare - because it signals the weakening of the Sharks Board and constitutes an incredible triumph for those working hard to protect sharks, who have been struggling to achieve the removal of the nets since 2008." 

Like many out there in the conservation space this news seems a bit odd to us...like wrong sounding Muppets.

But in fairness, let's all celebrate this news. Four nets, a victory, and Julie Anderson's redemption in the shark conservation space for years of mismanaged stage craft masquerading as an attempt to sell a Reality TV show...wait a minute...now we see it.

Could be the coffee kicking in but, stay with us here, if one wanted for the sake of argument to sell a Reality TV show about an org that saved sharks, and one happened to be peddling said show to various networks (we know because we walked into said networks weeks after), wouldn't one also want to post victory notices on websites even though said victories were:

"made quietly" and "without fanfare" and "recommended" and "within the next year"

Yup. Check that box. It's known as Wagging The Conservation Dog a distinct media specialty of Sea Shepherd and it's media clones. You take an issue, front run it to assume some sort of conservation victory, spread the story far and wide and sit back and collect donor dollars...or eye balls from networks.

Kinda of like wrong sounding Muppets and ENRON. In the conservation space the rules say you post actual victories, you celebrate actual change, you give thanks to folks who work hard for animals.

The rest is just media nonsense and for the sharks in Aliwal Shoal Marine Protected Area who will be killed in nets this week, next week, and the week after, the Shark Angels "victory" is as short lived as the animals that keep dying in them.

Mike's Blog - The Issue Ongoing.

Now for some amusement:



About Shark Diver. As a global leader in commercial shark diving and conservation initiatives Shark Diver has spent the past decade engaged for sharks around the world. Our blog highlights all aspects of both of these dynamic and shifting worlds. You can reach us directly at sharkcrew@gmail.com.

Shark Conservation - The Show Boats, the Sloggers, the Volunteers, The Public Media Conservationists, and then the Piggy Backers.

Every once in a while along comes a new shark blogger voice that cuts through the noise, digs deep into the world of sharks, and comes up with entertainingly brilliant stuff.

Such is Paul De Kock and his blog SharksWild this week.

Paul takes an unflinching look at shark conservation today and distills down to the "fun-de-mental" aspects of it including personalities, egos, orgs, and their efforts.

It's great stuff and smart writing.

The good news is there's an actual shark conservation movement out there. Not something that was even on the radar back in 2003.

But like all conservation efforts for whales, seals, tuna or sharks, once the movements have gelled it's important to sit back and take a hard look at current programs and solutions. Not something a lot of folks want to do, but ultimately necessary.

Sideways drift with conservation is something that all efforts suffer from and the notion that any conservation effort which brings "basic awareness" to an issue years down the line, no matter how self serving, is good for the effort - is false.

It's one of the tools organizations like Sea Shepherd uses to suck conservation donations out of the conservation space. Money that could be used to help next gen boots on the ground programs like replanting vast swaths of mangroves for shark nurseries is instead going to multi media extravaganzas that do nothing but demand conservation dollars from unwitting Facebook users.

Every conservation effort has stages. Initial stages are all about "awareness" but once an effort has enjoyed over 5 years of sustained effort, the next stages must be metrics based solutions that move away from awareness to action.

Read - The Show Boats, the Sloggers, the Volunteers, The Public Media Conservationists, and then the Piggy Backers.

Recognize anyone here?

Direct Action Failure? Sea Shepherds Next Act

While Sea Shepherd congratulates it's self on an eco win this year, the second act of it's direct action policy is playing out in Japan.

There's always a second act.

As was the case last year, Japan is considering moving whaling operations to fragile coastal waters targeting whale and dolphin populations within Japans territorial limits.

"Jun Morikawa, an academic at Rakuno Gakuen University and the author of a book about Japanese whaling, says he is concerned that because fewer whales were killed in the Southern Ocean, Japan may want to hunt more whales and dolphins in its own waters."

This is Japans ultimate trump card, regional whaling pressure on a scale not seen since the end of WW2, and a disaster for coastal whale populations.

Does Sea Shepherd have a plan for this outcome?

Probably not, as their thin veneer of legitimacy and argument against scientific whaling would all but disappear in the face of Japans navy and coast guard vessels. A similar Catch 22 to Sea Shepherds now completely failed 30 year anti-sealing effort in Canada, which culminated in the loss of a two million dollar vessel, impounded and then sold off by the Canadian Coast Guard in 2008.

Canada has recently signed a multi-million dollar trade agreement for seal products with China, the largest trade agreement of it's kind for seals, and a complete repudiation of 30 years worth of direct action policy on the part of Sea Shepherd.

Whaling must end, but is direct action the method in which long term success can be achieved, or like a water balloon, are Sea Shepherds actions just putting pressure on other animals that, until now, have enjoyed relative safety and security off the coast of Japan?

Story here.

32 Years in the Making Sea Shepherd Takes a Win?

We're no fans of Paul Watson and his insufferable braggadocio, compounded with an almost pathological disdain for the facts and truth, but on the other hand we're no fans of Japanese whaling either.

It would appear after 32 years of conservation noise, battles, reality television shows, and more lies and false reports than can be attributed to even the worst media output of a third rate dictatorship, (anyone remember Paul Watson getting shot?) Sea Shepherd has succeeded in pulling off a conservation win.

Japan has announced it will withdraw from whaling this season to "reassess it's operations in the region".

Hurray.

Does this mean and end to whaling? Time will tell.

Does this mean that Sea Shepherd will continue to be the most insufferable, mind numbing, small block conservation bully on the scene?

Unfortunately yes.

After 32 years of abject conservation failures from seals to tuna and sharks, Sea Shepherd will undoubtedly come out swinging at the many nay sayers (like us) who find their brand of conservation counter productive and wholly self serving.

But a win is a win, and even if the seals in Canada are still be harvested, now more than ever, (another Paul Watson epic fail) we'll give Sea Shepherd it's due.

After 32 years of trying, they, like that kid in the gym class who never could get a sit up right, deserve a tin star.

Congratulations.

Sea Shepherd Giving Up C4H8O2 - Left With Taunts?

Yes, it has been a while since we poked at the increasingly irrelevant and bloated Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. Mainly due to the fact that poking at a dead conservation corpse is about as much fun as...well poking at a corpse.

One story that did get our attention this week was SSCS sudden reversal from the use of C₄H₈O_2.

As a mainstay in the SSCS arsenal of moronic direct action tools, Paul Watson and company have touted the use of Butyric acid as it's direct action darling. Where Greenpeace were afraid to go SSCS would step boldly - Direct Action!

So why the sudden and very public reversal/spin on the use of C₄H₈O₂?

This is a question best left for those that follow this org religiously (we happen to love this guy) and one we'll leave to the SSCS experts to debate long after this non profit (?) has disbanded.

Fun Times Instructional Video

With SSCS now out of anything media worthy to hurl at Japanese whalers, we would like to offer the following instructional video on how to taunt your conservation opponent. Sadly whales will be killed once again during the 2011 Antarctic research hunt, and once again Sea Shepherd's reality television show will be there to...well, we're not sure what they will be there to do, but the following video might help the Shepherds in their ongoing Whale War - now in season number four with the highest ratings to date!

Is Sea Shepherd really saving whales?

With the announcement of a not-so-surprising impasse at this years IWC meeting Southern Fried Science takes a hard look at the "other effort" to curb whaling.

The data reveals activist conservation that is more about the media byte than saving whales.

Are we really being effective, or can whale conservation folks break free of the cycle of impasse and group think?

Southern Fried Science

Sea Shepherd claims that their actions in the Southern Ocean opposing Japanese whaling fleets has effectively reduced the number of whales killed. What always rubbed me the wrong way about these claims is that they always compare their success against the Institute for Cetacean Research (the Japanese organization that oversees ‘scientific whaling’) Quotas. So at some point you have to ask the question, in absolute numbers, has Sea Shepherd really reduced the number of whales killed?

To answer that we need three pieces of information:

1. When did Sea Shepherd begin it’s campaign against Japanese ‘scientific whaling’?
2. What are the ICR quotas for that time frame?
3. What are the absolute catches for that time frame?

Sea Shepherd provides a comprehensive timeline for their whaling campaigns that indicates serious opposition in the Southern Ocean began in December 2002.

For the two other questions, we turn to Whale and Dolphin Conservation International, who have produced a truly exceptional interactive graph of the history of whaling since the inception of the International Whaling Convention by the numbers. The relevant figure is reproduced below:

From this graph, we can see that Sea Shepherd began its campaign when whale catches were at their lowest, and catches have increased since then. Despite their claims of preventing whaling, we can see that more whales were killed per year after 2004 than any year before 2004. In other words, more whales are dying on Sea Shepherd’s watch.

Complete Post.

Sea Shepherd - Culinary Imperialism with a dark side of Racist Propaganda?

We have been less than fans of the continuing media antics of Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

From patently faked media events such as Paul Watson being shot in the chest by Japanese whalers, to ongoing SSCS anti-Japanese propaganda that harkens back to the ugliest moments of WW2.

Governments, such as Australia and New Zealand, lack the will to confront this radical and somewhat disingenuous eco group who invent eco news ad hoc whenever it suits their cause. A cause which, after 20 years of effort, has shown no real conservation changes to international whaling, seal harvests or shark finning, an effort that has devolved into an odd brand of cultural imperialism against Japan and Asia.

Sea Shepherd is an eco group attempting to dictate the cultural and culinary norms of another culture with the use of rotten butter, faked news clips, and a skillful use of Internet.

Wagging the Conservation Dog at every opportunity SSCS has skillfully made a mockery of every domestic and international law on the high seas.

Only Canada has taken any kind of stance against SSCS radicalism, impounding and then selling off the SSCS vessel Farley Mowat, leading to SSCS complete withdrawal from Canadian shores.

We're not alone in our online distaste with Sea Shepherd as an organization that has failed to effect any real and lasting eco change for the past 20 years. Since 2004 the legion of non radicalized eco folks who are becoming anti-Sea Shepherd is growing steadily.

One only has to look at online postings, and even popular culture commentator South Park to begin to understand the level and depth of this movement.

Recently blogger Nae Hauf-Way Hoos posted their observations of Paul Watson at a recent rally in New Zealand attended by "small crowd." Their observations of this event and the radical and racist tone being spewed forth by Paul Watson is concerning if not outright frightening.

"There is a worrying undercurrent of anti-Asian racism that permeates Sea Shepherd’s publicity and arguments. Most people, rightly, oppose whaling: the Sea Shepherd campaign connects this genuine environmental concern to much older, and dangerous, currents in Australian and New Zealand politics: nationalism, especially ‘left’ nationalism, and the racism that accompanies it. Facing an environmental challenge like the slaughter of endangered whales, we start to see a choice between an internationalist approach, stressing the potential for a politics which can unite, and a nationalism which turns genuine concerns into props for reactionary and toxic ideas. Greens Senator Bob Brown – with his talk of “our” whales, as if New Zealand and Australia ‘owned’ these creatures – and his anti-immigrant comments, re-enforces a long tradition of anti-Asian racism in this part of the world."

Complete Post.

Sea Shepherd - Losing Hearts and Minds

Sea Shepherd has "Jumped the Shark."

In the process they have become an open laughing stock of not only the conservation world but of the general public as well. What started with last summers expose on South Park has become a full blown online rebellion against staged reality television under the increasingly thin guise of protecting and saving wildlife.

By any metric including Sea Shepherds own Paul Watson they are losing the media battle for the hearts and minds of a non-radicalized public.

Watson recently posted a long winded and far fetched explanation for why the worlds online comment media is not buying into his spoon fed and faked Whale Wars spectaculars, such as the ill fated "Watson Was Shot" (Whale Wars Season One) and this years alleged ramming of the Ady Gil.

Paul Watson

"One of the most insidious and underhanded attacks has been the ability of the Japanese whaling industry to use cyber warfare. We have reason to believe that they have infiltrated internet social forums and websites with a well funded campaign of disinformation and strategies designed to undermine our morale and erode our support with a barrage of lies, ad hominem attacks, character assassination, and cyber bullying."

The most obvious explanation for Watson's pseudo Clive Barker analysis? The public is no longer buying into patently faked Sea Shepherd media. Sea Shepherd has grossly underestimated its audience and their intelligence.

Therein lies the problem. Across the Internet and beyond Western audiences are tuning out of the conservation message of whaling. Anti-whaling efforts have become an entertainment vehicle, not conservation, and Sea Shepherd is to blame for this bizarre shift in consciousness.

If Western watchers of these seasonal media antics are not buying into them, where are Eastern sympathies for Japans ongoing whaling efforts?

Smart Conservation People

There are some undoubtedly smart, dedicated people who work with Sea Shepherd, and to ignore them would be wrong. Like pirate vessels of old, the captains role as master and commander of his vessel was a "performance based job." Pirate crews had the right to depose their captain if he failed to deliver.

We would like to suggest that happens now.

Over the past decades Paul Watson alone has managed to stubbornly apply a leisure suit wearing 1970's strategy to every "save the" campaign he has put forth. Today, twenty plus years later, whales are still being killed, seals harvested, and sharks taken all over the world.

Meanwhile in just the past two years Watson has lost close to 4 million dollars in donor money, vessels and equipment. Canadian authorities recently sold his impounded vessel the Farley Mowat at auction and now the Ady Gil lies at the bottom of the sea. Not to mention the untold gallons of diesel and oil spilled into the pristine Antarctic, trying to save whales - yet again.

Paul Watson's continual resetting of eco goals is one indication that even he, in his most private moments, realizes his organization is failing to effect any real and lasting changes. Over the years he has been quoted as saying his goal is to "stop whaling." That soon changed to "limit the numbers of whales killed," and today Watson's new and fully open ended commitment to whales suggests that his goals are to "bankrupt the whalers." With that one statement Watson has slyly committed Sea Shepherd and its radicalized followers to another 20-30 years of ineffective media staging.

This years sinking of the Ady Gil was tantamount to a group of camera laden PETA protesters ramming a car into the side of a meat processing plant...and then blaming the plant for attempted murder.

The conservation world is becoming tarnished by a small group of increasing irrelevant media event stagers who have redefined the meaning of metric based conservation to reality entertainment.

Clearly, the public has had enough. What is needed now is leadership change from within.

Which begs the question, are there any real leaders within the Sea Shepherd ranks?

Sea Shepherd - Mastering Reality Disasters?

We would like to congratulate Sea Shepherd and Animal Planet on a fantastic staged event for television - perhaps one of the best staged disaster moments of 2010.

As production people ourselves we know the hazards and very real dangers of staging live disasters for television. It's a highly technical world only professionals can effectively operate in.

Multi-million dollar staged disasters are often canceled at the last minute due to OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) non-compliance or studio fears of death and dismemberment. Sea Shepherd on the other hand have found a way to circumvent all of the requirements for staged disaster television by only allowing volunteer crews and staging the events against non-paid, non-union, Japanese whalers.

By-passing all clean environmental requirements for television productions by producing this man made disaster in the Antarctic ocean was another master stroke. The clean up of several thousand gallons of bio diesel spilled by the Ady Gil and retrieval of the vessel from the sea floor would have cost Sea Shepherd and Whale Wars Productions millions if this disaster had been filmed in the USA.

Brilliant!

Managing to move Sea Shepherds $2 million dollar vessel Ady Gil into the path of Japanese whalers was a quirk of nautical timing by a seasoned captain who knew his vessel and the direction wind, waves, and engines were carrying it. Catching the whole thing on video from the Bob Barker at just the right angle was pure reality television.

We were doubly impressed with the witty and show branding quote from SSCS Paul Watson immediately after the stunt, "Now we're in a Real Whale War!" reminding the global audience that this is, after all, Must See TV!

Sea Shepherd Conservation Society have clearly evolved from earlier staged productions such as Paul Watsons being shot by Japanese whalers. In terms of production quality and emotional leverage that earlier staged event was not one of the top three of the 2007 reality television season.

Kudos to Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, Paul Watson, and Animal Planet for once again bravely leading the way into a new decade of reality television firsts. The televised disaster staging they have created together keeps getting better and better, and their complete and ongoing circumvention of all production norms and safety regulations allows their organization to literally shoot-for-the-moon.

We're looking forward to more man made disasters in the coming months!

More on Sea Shepherd Conservation Society here.

Sea Shepherd - Whale Defense Meat Grinder?

We're not sure if anyone stopped for a minute during the "1 Million dollar big check moment" with Sea Shepherd last month to really think about the acquisition of their high speed Earthrace vessel.

Renamed the Ady Gil and painted a nice black, the self styled eco warriors from Sea Shepherd have been touting this ship as their new weapon against Japanese whaling.

All we noticed were the two giant propellers at the back of the vessel that to us looked like big trouble for whales.

With a top speed of 45 knots the renamed Ady Gil credits at least one very serious collision with "submerged debris" during her life at sea.

"Shortly after leaving Palau on day 34, Earthrace struck submerged debris which sheared two blades off the port propeller and bent the drive shaft. This necessitated a return to Palau in order to assess the damage and remove the prop."

The propellers are German-designed, carbon propellers that are 36 inches in diameter.

To date Sea Shepherd have not provided "propeller shrouding" for these whirling Ginsu Knives of the Antarctic and intend on putting this vessel in between Japans harpoon vessels and the whales. Propeller shrouding would protect whales from these extreme blades while still allowing this vessel to "close intercept" with the animals and Japanese whalers.

Did Sea Shepherd or anyone in the eco media stop to think about this?

Clearly, in the rush to congratulate yet another futile season of reality television, no one did.

Sea Shepherd - Throwing Rocks For Media

Sea Shepherds ongoing international disappointment continues as a recent media tirade slammed South Africa's Marine and Coastal Management (MCM) officials who are now being labeled as "bloodthirsty tyrants" and "mad-dog killers".

Their crime, according to Sea Shepherds titular head Paul Watson, was the unfortunate mass euthanasia of a pod of beached whales.

Watson, whose organization circulated the media tirade, has called MCM a "disgrace to the nation" and said MCM official Mike Meyer had carried out a "savage, merciless, cold-blooded massacre".

Wait a Minute!

This is the same Sea Shepherd who just a few months ago was embroiled in a completely faked whale saving news story that this blog uncovered and then covered again as the story unfolded to its sad conclusion.

Sea Shepherds "Vanessa Pearce" claimed on national news that Sea Shepherd crews were actually on site of a mass Sperm whale standing in Tazmania. She went as far as claiming that Sea Shepherds vessel the Steve Irwin was on site with "actual whale saving gear" but was turned away by Park Rangers leaving the animals to suffer while shadowy figures used chainsaws on recently dead animals.

The entire story turned out to be bogus, but this is Sea Shepherd a direct action eco org that revels in throwing media bombs to maximum audience exposure and little effect.

At the recent tragic stranding in South Africa nothing could be done to save these animals from of lack of resources, ocean conditions, and time. It is to be noted some 120 local volunteers heroically tried to save whales in icy and rough conditions - to no avail. South Africa's Marine and Coastal Management staff are not "bloodthirsty tyrants" and "mad-dog killers" as Paul Watson has publicly charged. They made a tough decision, in tough conditions to put long suffering animals out of misery.

That takes guts, and foresight.

Perhaps Watson and company should spend less time throwing media rocks at glass houses and actually invest in that hypothetical "whale saving gear" his staff claims on Nine-MSN Tazmania to have on board the Steve Irwin.

They could have used it in South Africa recently.

Demand more from your eco org.

Sea Shepherd - Hemorrhaging on the Law

As the months grind on for Sea Shepherd and titular head Paul Watson, you have to ask the question "do they even have a plan anymore?".

As we have documented over the past year SSCS direct action policy is floundering both in Canada and Australia where the SSCS have come up against something they frequently demand International adherence to - the rule of law.

It would seem when SSCS quote the rule of law it justifies almost any action from ramming vessels to fabricating media output. When the rule of law is against them, those "others" are quickly and skillfully transformed into pirates, evil doers, and eco monsters by the SSCS media machine. Often to little effect as the rule of law grinds on and over the SSCS.

Your ongoing donations are fueling this wholesale direct action disaster.

In Canada, direct action vessel Farley Mowat was seized and auctioned off to howls of protest by SSCS who devoted their time to rewriting and blogging about the "facts" of the encounter and Canadian rule of law. The vessel was caught breaking the law and in due process lost SSCS donors close to one million dollars when this vessel was sold off last month. Fact is the SSCS anti-sealing plan failed in a spectacular gamble that might have worked better if SSCS had just handed a cool million to the sealers and told them to go home.

To add to the ongoing gamble, Captain Alex Cornelissen of the Netherlands and 1st Officer Peter Hammarstedt of Sweden failed to appear in Canadian court on April 27th. They will be tried in absentia and most likely found guilty, banned from Canada forever as fugitives.

Direct Action Policy

The rule of law is not pretty, particularly when applied to wildlife. Treaties and governments often produce rules and regulations that do great damage to wildlife. These are also the constraints that all eco group with credibility operate under. There is a playing field, there are rules. If you want to get anything done in the eco world you have to build alliances, consensus, and work within the confines, or just outside the confines of the rule of law. This works and groups help wildlife everyday, changing rules, saving wildlife.

SSCS failed 1970's direct action techniques are costing donors millions, and as with the case in Japan have now opened near shore whaling operations - handing down a death sentence to whales off the coasts of Japan. This is the true face of direct action when applied without skill, and without a coherent plan with an eye to the rule of law.

Let's rethink the plan. Hemorrhaging eco dollars and media into high profile wildlife issues gains little and helps no one.

Sea Shepherd - Japans Coastal Whale Slaughter

When direct eco action fails - it usually fails spectacularly. Case in point the ongoing "Whale War" with Sea Shepherd and Japans whaling fleet in Antarctica.

For the past two seasons SSCS has been "wagging the conservation dog" with a series of staged media events, massaged and frankly erroneous news reports, and continued vessel rammings that have caused Japan to, for the first time in decades, kill whales within its territorial waters.

Unintended consequence to a failed direct action eco policy that has handed down a death sentence to the whales off the coasts of Japan.

To the architect of this disaster, Mr.Paul Watson and his television show Whale Wars, the 2008-9 anti whaling effort remains an expensive and media costly Pyrrhic Victory. On blogs and news sites across the world SSCS is claiming to have actually saved whales this season while at the same time failing to discuss this new and unfolding whale killing disaster in front of them. Perhaps it is best to focus on what eco wins you can get. For us at this blog and the many posts we have devoted to SSCS direct action policy failures - it is not so simple.

Paul Watson media quote, 4.16.2009 Telegraph U.K:

'People say I manipulate the media,' says Watson, who speaks calmly with an undertone of anger and lofty scorn for anyone who doubts or opposes him. 'Well, duh. We live in a media culture so why on earth wouldn't I?

Will SSCS join Japans fleet and renewed killing effort off it's territorial waters this season to save whales yet again?

With one vessel at "reluctant auction" in Canada at a loss of $800,000 to SSCS and donors and with the Steve Irwin banned from Japans waters - the chances of SSCS being there to save whales being needlessly slaughtered off Japans coastlines is as likely as Paul Watsons assassination claims of 2008.

It is high time to rethink direct action. The world has changed, conservation policies need to change with it or fade into the sunset.

Whale Wars Season Two - Cut, Print

As Sea Shepherd departs from the Southern ocean, once again, claiming to have saved whales from evil whalers let's take a look at their anti whaling efforts in perspective.

This week titular head of organization Paul Watson rammed his vessel into whalers with Animal Planet film crews capturing every moment for season two of Whale Wars. Classic Wagging the Conservation Dog moment with just days to go for Sea Shepherds departure from the area.

The conflict of interest with their reality television relationship goes beyond mentioning, suffice to say it begs the question "what is real and what is staged?"

After this weeks boat ramming spree Watson then claimed "the situation down here is getting very, very chaotic and very aggressive". This statement is tantamount to anti meat protesters ramming their cars into the side of beef processing factories and claiming the same. Add to that a waiting reality television film crew and you begin to see not only the uselessness of actions like these but the abject media fueled cannibalism of the entire event.

What you are looking at is staged eco theater with a side of dead whale at a cost of millions of well meaning dollars from people who really want to see and end to whaling. Like us.

To put this into perspective, this year Watson and company will claim to have saved perhaps 60 whales, that claim, like so many others from Sea Shepherd, will be seriously contested. Meanwhile Watson and company dangerously and egregiously risked a fuel oil breach from either his own vessel or those he rammed in the Southern ocean this year.

In the time it took Sea Shepherd to elicit funds, build a campaign, invite a reality television crew aboard and pump out a mass of seriously massaged media sound bites-whales died worldwide:

48 Sperm Whales Stranding

2 Right Whales Stranding

65 Pilot Whales Stranding

10 Sperm and Pilot Wales Stranding

150 Pilot Whales Stranding

At what cost per whale will donors continue to subsidize and support ineffective media theatre brought to you by Sea Shepherd and company. For us the equation is simple:

Has whaling stopped? No.

Will season two of Whale Wars have moments of high drama with vessels being rammed? Yes.

Is this quality eco work? The answer to that question can be answered with the contents of your wallet or your check book. Place you bets where they will be most effective. For our money Sea Shepherd is out of touch, out of game, and out of time.

Whale Wars Sea Shepherd Credibility Gap 2009

How can anyone take the stumbling and ineffective antics of Sea Shepherd seriously when titular head of organization Paul Watson lies so badly that a monkey, encased in ice, and shot into deep space could see through them.

Not that we condone the shooting monkeys into deep space. We just find the visual image amusing.

Yes, we're talking about the "shot that never was" wherein Paul Watson entirely fabricated a shooting of his grand personage for a film crew and reality television show called Whale Wars.

Why are we talking about it again? Here's an excerpt from Watsons latest blog post, transmitted to the planet as religious eco gospel and regurgitated by many well meaning bloggers and eco websites who have yet look into the core of Sea Shepherd:

"The Union that supplies the crew for the whaling ships is a Yakusa controlled Union. I've been making that charge for years without a single denial from the Union, the whalers or anyone else. The only defense for that charge is to ignore it with the hope it goes away or to assassinate the person making the charge which is exactly what they tried to do last season when someone on the Nisshin Maru shot me."

Once again Paul Watson is repeating his obese assassination fabrication of 2008. A lie that was quickly dispelled by those who know weapons, shooting, and the impossibility of the shot that Watson claims almost took his miserably fabricated life.

Not even the producers of Whale Wars believe Watsons attempted assassination claim and have quietly backed away from admitting that this entire event was indeed staged.

We need credible witnesses to the ongoing whaling efforts of Japan. Sea Shepherd lies so continually that no one, not even Watson, has a grasp on what is the truth anymore. The original lie was bad enough, repeating the lie over and over again reveals a pathological psychosis that is disturbing. Made worse by the fact this man is the captain of a vessel and in charge of others lives in an unforgiving ocean.

Is this what you want from your conservation organization?

Sea Shepherd-Wagging The Conservation Dog

We blogged about the "shot that never was" a few months ago.

A lie sent forth by Sea Shepherd so egregious, so fantastical, that we were pretty sure people would see through it's blatant transparencies and demand action.

Alas, as Shakespeare once pointed out, "all the world's a stage and we are merely players". It would seem that Paul Watson's media people read Shakespeare.

As Sea Shepherd flounders around in the Southern ocean (once again) searching desperately for television ratings under the guise of saving whales let's pause for a moment and perhaps listen to the other side of this issue. The points they bring up are important.

Real conservation is goal and result oriented. What Sea Shepherd is doing with the hard earned millions of well meaning eco donors is tantamount to creating a floating version of the Moulin Rouge...except at the end of this bacchanalia of poor judgement, made up press releases, and missed opportunities there remains next years whale hunt.

Sea Shepherd is as ineffectual this year as it has been for the past ten when it comes to stopping the hunting of whales. The addition of a 24/7 film crew from Discovery Channel's Animal Planet adds to the dangers and unnecessary hubris that is Wagging The Conservation Dog.

Press Release JWA

“Last season in the Antarctic, the presence of the Animal Plant film crew pushed the Sea Shepherd extremists into committing more and more dangerous actions, all for the benefit of the camera,” said the President of the JWA, Mr Keiichi Nakajima.

“Paul Watson even orchestrated a fake event to make it look like he was shot, all of which was aimed at denigrating Japan and boosting the ratings of the Animal Planet un-reality TV series.”

Mr Nakajima said JWA was even more concerned this season because there is now the added expectation that the Sea Shepherd-Animal Planet crew will take even greater risks and perform even more serious criminal acts for the second series for Animal Planet.

Note: Whaling has no place in today's oceans, we have always said this. But profiting from the death of whales as Sea Shepherd and Animal Planet are doing with their new show Whales Wars is, in our opinion, worse.

Shark Swarm-Daryl Hannah-Politics of Whales

Hunting in Packs...Killing Without Mercy.

That's the headline of Shark Swarm perhaps one of, if not the worst 3 hour anti shark film, ever to grace the silver screen...actually this film was so bad it went straight to television by passing the silver screen and silver tongued film critics along the way.

Shark Swarm with it's 40+ shredded body count, stars Daryl Hannah. Ms Hannah who claims to be an eco activist is currently on board the Steve Irwin with Sea Shepherd adding some eco credibility to her resume "saving whales".

Strangely, and we're sure this has nothing to do with her current involvement with Sea Shepherd, a film crew from Animal Planet will also be on board Wagging the Conservation Dog for the second year in a row.

Disclaimer: We think whaling should end and are no fans of Japans hunt-unfortunately Sea Shepherd is a bad actor whose overall damage to the global eco movement and flow of much needed funds to legitimate eco orgs has caused lasting and serious harm.

As we have been blogging Sea Shepherd has lost it's way in terms of eco messaging and being effective. In fact if recent events are concluded in Canada one might argue they have even lost their way financially.

The Romans had a saying for both Sea Shepherd's antics and Ms Hanna's latest foray into the eco movement "Ad Captandum Vulgus". We think she could have made a better statement by passing on the Shark Swarm project and highlighting the global slaughter of sharks instead. At least her credibility as an "eco activist" would still be intact.

Whale Wars-Wagging the Conservation Dog

Our Whale Wars post this week has generated a mass of offline and thoughtful emails here at Underwater Thrills. We also got a few hysterical foaming-at-the-mouth diatribes as well.

Here's one example highlighting how Wagging the Conservation Dog harms an entire movement:

Sea Shepherd are not helping whales, they are exacerbating the problem. Every time they clash with the whaling ships in the Antarctic, the Japanese look like the victims, and they spin this for all it's worth at the IWC - "irresponsible NGOs, terrorist organisations" etc. SSCS are gifting the Japanese whalers a bargaining chip to use within the international diplomatic community. Whilst their hearts might be in the right place, and their passion evident, SSCS are sadly out of touch with reality.

Conservation doesn't happen by putting yourself between a harpoon and a whale - although admittedly that is a great way to get publicity. Real conservation happens in international fora - at the IWC, at CITES, within CMS, ACCOBAMS and ASCOBAMS. It's only though negotiation and diplomacy that NGOs can persuade governments and decision-making bodies to lay down new laws that protect wildlife . A £10,000 donation to an NGO that does this kind of work will secure the future of thousands or perhaps millions of whales and dolphins - SSCS would burn through it in a couple of days chasing the Japanese whalers around icebergs, giving just a handful of whales a temporary reprieve.

SSCS are attracting a lot of attention for their antics, and this is diverting funds from the organisations that can really make the difference. The environmental NGO community has come a long, long way in the past 20 years, and we've got inside governments and international fora to a point where we affect REAL change. By tackling the economics of whaling and trade, creating legal frameworks, working with industry and governance - we are making a huge difference to the conservation and welfare of these animals worldwide.

SSCS are alienating and undermining the conservation movement, not helping it. Funders should think long and hard before giving money to SSCS, and question the true value of what they get in return.