Paul Watson and the sinking of the "Ady Gil"

There are a lot of conservation organizations out there, all looking to raise money for their causes. It's rare that you see a call to sign a petition etc. that is not automatically asking you for money, after you signed it. There is nothing inherently wrong with asking for money, because there are cost involved with saving the oceans. With some groups however, making money seems to be the main purpose, regardless of who, or what they hurt in the process. Take the following example.

In 2010 the "Ady Gil", a small vessel operated by the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society  collided with the Japanese whaling ship "Shonan Maru 2" and sank some time later. "SSCS" has always claimed that the collision damage inflicted on the "Ady Gil" is what caused her to sink and maintained that the Japanese intentionally rammed their vessel.

There is video evidence that the collision itself was actually caused by the captain of the "Ady Gil", by accelerating into the path of the "Shonan Maru 2" at the last moment. In this video, you can see that the "Ady Gil" is stopped in the water and a little before the collision there is whitewater behind the vessel, a sign that it engaged the props and accelerated forward, right into the path of the Japanese ship. 

This video has led some people to accuse SCCS of intentionally causing this accident to create publicity for their "Whale Wars" TV show and to raise money from their supporters. I'm not accusing the captain of the "Ady Gil" of trying to intentionally ram the Japanese ship. While I think it's more likely that he wanted to cut right in front of it to get some dramatic TV footage and simply miscalculated, the claim that SSCS created this whole event gained some credibility, when in the aftermath of the sinking, Pete Bethune, the captain of the "Ady Gil" came out and stated that he deliberately sank the vessel on the orders of Paul Watson.

Sea Shepherd maintained that the "Ady Gil" sank because of the damage it sustained during the collision and that they made every effort to save it.  In reply to Bethune's admission, the SSCS released this statement by Watson. In part it read: "So why has Bethune decided to make such an accusation to the media and the public that I ordered him to sink the Ady Gil?

The answer is obvious. I fired him the day before for providing false statements to the Japanese police. He then threatened to make this allegation against me if I did not reinstate him. I refused. In fact, I sent Bethune’s threats to the media before he released them."

After hearing Bethune's confession, Ady Gil, a person who donated 1 Million $ to the SSCS and who the boat was named after, ended up suing them for the loss of the vessel. After years of back and forth, last September, the arbitrator in this case issued finally issued a ruling that now became public.

The ruling includes a scathing assessment of Paul Watson: "The Arbitrator found Mr. Watson’s testimony regarding certain events to be highly evasive, internally contradictory, or at odds with his own prior written statements, and in certain areas simply lacking the basic indicia of genuineness that instinctively inspires confidence and trust"

So now we know that Paul Watson ordered the deliberate sinking of the "Ady Gil"

A couple of days ago, Chuck Swift, former captain of the Sea Shepherd vessel "Bob Barker" also came out and admitted publicly that the "Ady Gil" was intentionally sunk and issued a public apology on Facebook, for his role in it. 

YES. I, along with Pete Bethune and Luke VanHorn, did board the vessel Ady Gil and intentionally scuttled it. We sank the vessel Ady Gil and lied to everyone inside and outside of SSCS to cover that truth. You can read his entire statement here

Why was it so important to Paul Watson to sink the "Ady Gil"? Before acceding to Mr. Watson’s demands, (to deliberately scuttle the vessel) Mr. Swift recalls that he asked Mr. Watson, “Why is this so important to you?”, and Mr. Watson responded, “Our audience needs closure.”  I guess this illustrates  where Paul Watson's priorities are. Entertaining his audience is more important than what he claims to care about. Of course Watson had no qualms about the fact that the "closure" he provided to his TV audience was a blatant lie and he didn't hesitate to use that lie to raise money.  

From the ruling: Of course, whatever the rationale for deceiving the viewing public (which might be presumed to understand that “reality shows” do not actually reflect reality)  

Here are some excerpts from the arbitrators ruling, that offer insight into the reasons the SSCS wanted to scuttle the "Ady Gil" and how "real" "whale wars" really is.

the evidence suggests that the Ady Gil was unlikely to sink for any appreciable period of time, notwithstanding the damage she incurred from the collision with the Japanese fleet  

the crew’s thinking (to scuttle to Ady Gil) seems to have been directly influenced by the presence of the Animal Planet film crew, which gave SSCS unparalleled public exposure and greatly expanded its fundraising possibilities.  
Certainly, a plodding tow operation to deliver a damaged vessel to shore would not have made for interesting television viewing 

By contrast, the collision of the Shonan Maru #2 with the Ady Gil already had captured unparalleled media attention, with Mr. Watson giving interviews from the Steve Irwin and Pete Bethune taking non-stop media calls on board the Bob Barker. The crew was acutely aware that the sinking of the Ady Gil would create the occasion for more dramatic reality television  

Indeed, Mr. Swift testifies that “during our discussions/arguments leading up to my capitulation to Paul’s order to sink the Ady Gil, he was telling me ... ‘Oh, the media on this would be great.’” 

Paul’s a genius, and he’s a media genius especially. And sometimes he’s open-minded, and sometimes, he’s not. And, when he sets his mind on something he’s like a pit bull getting lock jaw, and I was unable to change his mind, which is why I eventually executed his orders 

As for the scene in "Whale Wars", where Bethune and Swift discussed abandoning the ship: The decision to stage this scene for the cameras was the result of discussions between Mr. Bethune and Mr. Swift, in the presence of the Animal Planet crew: they said we need to just create the scene that makes it look like you were making the decision to abandon the boat. And I knew from Whale War’s perspective, ... the decision to abandon a boat by the captain is a pretty powerful scene. I went along with it

The arbitrator offered this thought. Of course, whatever the rationale for deceiving the viewing public (which might be presumed to understand that “reality shows” do not actually reflect reality), there was no legal or moral justification for deceiving Claimants, the owners of the Ady Gil.

So we know that SSCS and Paul Watson have no problem deceiving their supporters and the viewers of "Whale Wars" who think that the series is an actual documentary. What is interesting to find out is that they equally have no problem with throwing their own employees, donors and volunteers under the bus, blaming them for their own actions.

There are many great organizations working to save the oceans and it's inhabitant and I encourage to support them. Just check them out carefully before you choose which one you want to support. 

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.

Paul Watson 'enclosure' plans in Japan 'flawed and misguided'

By Andrew Tafferty, Staff Writer, The Age 

A Japanese underwater cameraman's plans to capture eco fugitive Paul Watson so tourists can throw rotten butter at him in Japan has infuriated conservationists, who said claims the scheme would create peace and harmony around the world "do not add up".

Daito Suzuki, a camera  operator for Ninkei One, wants to build a 20,000 square foot enclosure in Taiji, Japan that includes an exact replica of the Steve Irwin for Watson to inhabit.

Visitors would pay £65 each to gain access, and an additional £65 to throw rotten butter at Watson just like his television series Whale Wars. The money would be used to fund real conservation organizations like PEW Trusts.

But a group of conservationists and wildlife charities, including Save Captain Crunch in Britain, called Mr Suzuki's plans "flawed and deeply misguided" and have urged authorities in Japan to halt it.

The scheme's opponents deny Mr Suzuki's claims that Paul Watson is an insufferable media loon who would best be kept in long term enclosures like the one being proposed in Taiji, where his daily rantings and crazy antics could be watched by paying clients for their amusement.

"The conservation arguments for this project do not add up," said David Ottley, Japans coordinator for Sea Shepherd.

"You cannot tell me that Paul Watson who is known to enjoy lavish Hollywood fund raising parties with $75.00 sustainable appetizers, can be happily confined to a 20,000 foot enclosure with an exact replica of the Steve Irwin, with no possible escape from tourist stress, no ability to feed naturally, nor seek out the natural conditions that suit him at different times of the year, nor have Internet access."

The enclosure, south of Higashimuro District, Wakayama, Japan and close to popular tourist beaches, would double as a marine rescue and rehabilitation centre, Mr Suzki said.

"This is not some hoodlum misthought project, my opponents are misinformed," he told The Age.

"We have been working on this for more than ten years, since Paul Watson first started to try and shut down Japan's scientific whaling, it's a million-dollar investment and we have the support of some of Japans leading conservationists and the JWA."

Some proceeds from the profits of money earned from tourists would also pay for displaced Sea Shepherd crews to process cashew nut shells into oil at factories in Japan.

Mr Suzuki is waiting for final approvals from  Japans National Environmental Management Authority, which is expected to decide whether the project should go ahead next week.

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.

Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd, Cowardice Under Direct Action Fire?

Interpol, the worlds police, have issued a Red Notice for Paul Watson titular head of Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and Watson is currently on the run exhibiting a simply stunning display of abject cowardice in the face of Direct Action.

This is a wake up call to his donor base both large and small. Your conservation money, the money you had hoped would be used for change, has been taken from you by a slick conservation media machine.

And while no one wants to get inside the mind of the Sea Shepherd faithful for fear they will discover an overweight hamster on a giant wheel wheezing to a techno version of Kermit The Frogs, "It's not Easy Being Green," one has to ask, why run Paul?

Paul Watson is more than happy to send his volunteers/unpaid reality tv actors into situations that ultimately put then in harms way while he himself is unwilling to even step into a court room where he would get to explain his Direct Action policies to the widest audience he has ever had.

Watson instead has crafted a series of inane excuses for his lack of,  "Doushitemo" (at any cost), which flies in the face of far too many of Watsons own stump speeches to his donor base where he regales them with tales of personal bravery on the high seas.

About that, as it turns out Watson is also not above faking his own assassination attempts to bolster his claims of conservation bravery. This is an organization that, "at any cost," spends donor money to pump out slick conservation media fakery, year after year, to garner more donations.

It's a Conservation Möbius Loop of the worst kind.

After 30 years Sea Shepherd has proved an abject failure as an organization for actual and lasting changes to wildlife.

They have become unfortunate parodies of themselves and in the minds of their donor base, "too big to fail." There's a meme out there that suggests, and is propagated by Sea Shepherd, that if they stop their Direct Actions the entire world will go to hell in a hand-basket because there are no other organizations out there to fill the void.

It's a lie.

In fact there are plenty of small boots on the ground organizations out there, thanks in large part to social media and smart phones, that need your help now. They are the real face of conservation, not the donor paid vacations in the South Pacific with Sea Shepherds elite Shark Angels - an ongoing conservation sham where the biggest hurdle this "elite team" faces has been the lack of access to dwindling supplies of glitter lip gloss and SPF 50.

You have a choice, dig a bit deeper in your search for a conservation organization org that delivers change, or continue to support a bloated increasingly irrelevant organization that at it's core (Paul Watson) fails to live up to the ongoing hype.

Paul Watson as an conservation organization leader has shown to the world that his organization does not deserve your respect, admiration, or money.

For many out there in the conservation sphere this is not news. For the Sea Shepherd faithful who like the idea of wearing pirate shirts and being part of something grand, this is gut check time.

Support something new, try something small, grow an organization that delivers conservation change and one that you know will spend your conservation money wisely. Fact is when any organization gets to over 11 million dollars in revenue resources and it's Conservation CEO is placed on Interpols Red Notice you have to wonder...are the worlds animals really being served here?

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.

Sea Shepherd, Paul Watson, and Direct Action on Trial

Paul Watson has fled Germany.

So much for the vaunted Sea Shepherd mantra, "we will do anything for wildlife."

That quote is part of Sea Shepherds media machine or as the rest of the hard working conservation world knows it, the "Donor Dollar Sucking Machine."

Why did Paul Watson flee Germany?

He was about to be arrested, deported, and sent for trial in Latin America. It's part of the world of Direct Action, a conservation policy that says it is o.k to harass and ram vessels and interfere directly with wildlife harvests anywhere in the world - irregardless of treaties, fisheries policies, and or the personal health and well being of the participants on either side of the wildlife issue.

We're all for it, "if" it has long lasting results, like stopping a slaughter completely...and forever.

Unfortunately Direct Action is a failed policy because it stops nothing, from seal harvests, to Bluefin tuna, to whales. One might think that 30 years is enough time to gather a consensus on any policy failed or not.

Direct Action does create great Reality Television moments like this one for Season One of Whale Wars where Paul Watson faked being shot in the chest. It also sucks conservation dollars out of the atmosphere like an out-of-control and cartoonish Hoover vacuum.

And that's the problem with Direct Action. Donor money that could be used by forward thinking conservation entities who have boots on the ground and great conservation programs that actually save wildlife being sucked away by a constant, high profile, and unrelenting Direct Action Buffonery lead by Sea Shepherd and Paul Watson.

30 long years, and now when the chips are finally down for Watson, when it looks like he will have to face some measure of legal reality for his failed conservation policy...he slips away under cover of darkness.

The lawsuit, the extradition, the ensuing media surrounding Paul Watson's trial in Latin America was to be a public airing of Direct Action as a policy by conservationists the world over.

Sadly, because Paul Watson is ultimately a coward who would rather invent death defying moments at sea vis-a-vis his faked assassination moment, we will never get to see Direct Action on trial.

Instead prepare yourself for another 30 years of invented Direct Action moments that fail completely, save for the flow of money leaving the rest of the conservation sphere and into more inventive media moments brought to you by Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

Run, Paul, Run.

More here.

Sea Shepherd Fiji's Shark Conservation Boondoggle?

South Pacific vacation idylls with donor money? Yup!

First of all an indulgence and a short education of the word, "Boondoggle."

Boondoggle - work of little or no value done merely to look busy waste, wastefulness, dissipation - useless or profitless activity; using or expending or consuming thoughtlessly or carelessly; "if the effort brings no conservation gain it is a waste"; "mindless dissipation of  donor resources."

Which brings us to the topic du jour, Sea Shepherds South Pacific Shark Conservation Campaign.

You know the one. It was preceded by several breathless press releases and this over-the-top conservation PSA which promised to kick ass and take names and numbers once the Sea Shepherds arrived in the South Pacific.

For the sharks!

This particular PSA was met with the following statement from the Ministry of Defense in Fiji and if you have not read it, read it, it's an eye opener. In short Fiji has several amazing shark conservation programs in place with hardworking folks and a plan to make Fiji a Shark Sanctuary.

These are long term, local grass roots programs, the best of shark conservation in action.

Sadly, like most of Sea Shepherds media outreach the reality on the ground for Operation Requiem could not be more different from their media hype and this post is directed at the Sea Shepherd donor base whose money pays for Sea Shepherd vessel assets to spend months in the South Pacific wandering about from island to island.

Is this how you envisioned your money being spent?

Instead of changing the world for sharks as the propaganda suggests by direct action where members of this elite (ahem) South Pacific team would "gladly trade their lives for sharks," they, in the fine tradition of missionaries the world over, are spending their time spreading the Gospel of St Paul The Conservation Redeemer to islanders, and even commercial long liners.

More on those commercial long liners in a minute.

In Fiji their efforts have been about as helpful as tourists who steal things from World Heritage Sites.

It's great "conservation work" if you can get it and we know of at least a half dozen or so hard working NGO's who at this very moment are saving actual sharks with boots on the ground efforts that could use a three month "vacation" to the South Pacific to "save" sharks.

Unlike Sea Shepherd, these NGO's do not have hundreds of thousands of dollars to spend pumping out simply fantastical cover stories or even have access to floating palaces to causally saunter from island to island with. These NGO's do not seek the mainstream media limelight, their staff do not demand a personality cult for species. They are the real deal vs grandiose "look-at-me-ain't-I-grand" conservation buffoonery at sea.

Once again Sea Shepherd's media vs actual conservation realities stand at stark contrast to each other. No sharks are being saved in this campaign but the weather is nice and the media they are pumping out looks great.

So back to the commercial long liners. In Fiji the proposed Shark Sanctuary is in its final decision process and for anyone in the shark conservation community who has fostered a shark sanctuary you know these final days are finger nail biting times where last minute deals, phone calls, and conversations hopefully lead to thousands of square miles of shark safe zones. A first step in a long and drawn out process.

These are precarious times, and anything can derail these last minute negotiations.

Enter Sea Shepherd and a post on their website from the elite team of Shark Angels who, if you remember, were asked in no uncertain terms to stay out of Fiji in the first place. They ignored that request and instead sat down with a local long liner who had his own anti shark sanctuary propaganda to spill forth.

Until Sea Shepherds Shark Conservation Campaign came along this Fijian long liner had no one willing to regurgitate his propaganda for him:

"Nathan worries the Fijian shark sanctuary proposed won’t be effective – the sharks will simply be taken elsewhere and legitimate operators will be the ones punished. He feels the use of wire traces should be prohibited (and enforced) around the world and it will decrease shark mortality by at least 80%. And he believes the fact none of his peers and the commercial fishing industry were properly consulted will result in its lack of the Shark Sanctuary approval in Fiji - in order to be successful, the legislation needs to consider all constituencies.  Pretty sound reasoning (regardless of whether I agree or not) for someone I had assumed was going to be without a clue."

You read that correctly. It is conservation garbage. It has also been mainlined directly into the propaganda machine that is Sea Shepherd for reasons that no one in the wider shark conservation community understands. It serves no purpose but to derail delicate negotiations in Fiji by a group of wandering shark media interlopers who are masquerading as actual shark conservationists.

Is this how you want your donor money being spent?

There's a choice people have to make. Support organizations that do real work and have real metrics for success when it comes to saving wildlife. Or fall for the hype and glossy PSA's that show action! pathos! and steel jawed animal savers with the wind in their hair, and just the right amount of lip gloss to catch the light.

You quickly find that 99% of the hype is good old fashioned conservation bullshit lead by conservation leaders who inspire their hand selected followers with their own brand of faked media moments for wildlife.

It has to end because the flip side to all this conservation noise is the donation button. It's the button Sea Shepherd hopes you press so they can continue on with their 30 year Boondoggle Machine.

Their machine is a well oiled beast that drops "elite teams" into hot spots around the world to take a few pictures, hype a few videos, and produce more media content next to that donation button.

The choice is ultimate yours and your wallets. Are you donating for changes to wildlife or another reality tv show?

In Fiji the choice is clear. We wish the Sea Shepherds well on their continued voyages and as a helpful hint make sure you use that 50 SPF sunblock. You don't want to start looking like someone from an actual NGO who has just finished planting 30,000 mangrove roots to create a shark nursery.

No, that would just be too horrible to contemplate and frankly nothing media worthy about it at all.

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.

Sea Shepherd Fiji and Conservation Carpetbagging?

The conservation world became alerted to "something odd" in the shark conservation space a few weeks ago when the island nation of Fiji posted this warning about Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.

What was particularly interesting about this open letter to the world was Fiji's recognition that Sea Shepherd as an organization had become more of a conservation parody of itself over the past decade with it's homespun reality tv shows and media stunts, and less an actual force for real and lasting conservation change.

Fiji's open letter was the first look behind the Green Curtain for Sea Shepherd, revealing for the first time by a sovereign nation a bloated conservation media machine run by kool aid drinking drones who seek fame in the conservation space as the new Conservation Kardashians.

We wrote a satirical post about this last week.

Case in point Sea Shepherds abject failures to stop sealing in Canada after 30 years of media circus, whaling in Antarctica, Bluefin Tuna harvests, or even propose and foster any manner of metrics based conservation efforts that leave behind lasting change for wildlife.

In fact metrics based conservation, the kind of lasting hard work in one area to see that conservation is done right is not in Sea Shepherds DNA. They are spectacle makers first and foremost choosing the easy conservation route of shifting conservation baselines, and "awareness for conservation."

By now, and thanks to the hard work of tens of thousands of people the world over who have never sought the limelight, people are fully "aware" that sharks are in trouble.

For the past decade and lead by some true innovators in the region Fiji has created several admirable boots on the ground programs that have made real and lasting differences to the lives of sharks and these amazing programs continue to this day.

What's a stake in Fiji is a new Sea Shepherd reality tv show that looks very much like Sea Shepherds other reality tv shows that offer hype, broken vessels, and a particularly nauseating brand of "personality cult for species" that is looking to carpetbag its way into Fiji for a quick media pump and dump.

Conservation Carpetbagging is not new, but it has been perfected by Sea Shepherd.

The Academy Award winning movie The Cove was subsumed by Sea Shepherd in an orgy of bad taste and poor media judgement. It was Conservation Carpetbagging at its finest and a clear indication of Sea Shepherds willingness to take any effort done by others and make it their own for the clear purpose of draining conservation dollars into Sea Shepherd coffers.

Hence the grave concern being directed at the new Fijian shark effort by Sea Shepherd and it's clones.

The shark world does not need another personality cult and sharks could care less if these hackneyed media seekers would "die for sharks."

In fact to even publicly state this, to put yourself in a media situation that you know is completely false from the get go is to let down the animals you profess to care so deeply about. It is the poorest choice of words for animals that need change, not hype and more "awareness."

Sadly the issue of this new programs involvement in Fijian waters has not been resolved even with the recent letter by the Fijian Government to the rest of the world. As it turns out instead of moving on to other Pacific islands could in fact use help for sharks Sea Shepherd is trying to back channel their way back into the region and into work done by others.

For readers of this blog you'll note we broke with Sea Shepherd the year Paul Watson faked his own assassination for season one of Whale Wars. It was an eye opening moment that should have shocked others in the conservation space to their core.

It did for some.

For others it opened their eyes and desires to become Conservation Rock Stars. The reality that you could bald face lie to millions on television and then be invited to swanky Hollywood cocktail parties to feast on $75.00 sustainable appetizers served to you by out of work actors whilst being feted by big dollar donors who admired your latest brush with death for wildlife.

Sharks don't need this. Sharks need actual help.

Reality tv shows that are designed to callously suck up conservation dollars in return for media spectacle and personality cult offering "awareness" are as damaging to sharks as the fishing fleets that target them, because those on the actual front lines with real solutions need those dollars more than ever.

Food for thought.


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.

The Oxygen Shark Myth - Debunking the Bunkable

What would Steve Zissou say?

Ah, yes, and now it is an open discussion, any takers?

We're talking about the Sea Shepherd School of WTF Media inspired shark conservation quackery about sharks and oxygen.

You know the one we are talking about because it goes something like this:

"If we lose all the worlds sharks we will run out of oxygen to breathe".

The single most stunning moronic conservation quote of the century. Based not in fact, created to help sell a film, and gobbled up like Conservation PEZ by those who trade exclusively in "shark conservation chatter".

But don't take our word for it.

Good old Da Shark in Fiji has taken this issue on like few others can with a nice mixture of ranting, analogy, historical context, links to others, and yes some freaking science people!

For Want of Some Freaking Science

So here we are with a veritable tide of discontent directed at the purveyors of the oxy shark myth, and so far nothing. No push back, no irate "how dare you," nothing at all. We would have thought if this juicy factoid about sharks was in fact true that our constant poking at shark conservations "most hallowed media byte" would have elicited at least a good old fashioned "F%@!% you".

Frankly we're disappointed.

The oxy shark myth is one more nail in the coffin for an entire grass roots movement begging for credibility and clinging to a never ending series of high energy Facebook postings, twice baked petitions, and Hockey Mom Hysteria based on the cracked and crumbling foundation of, "if we lose all the worlds sharks we will run out of oxygen to breathe".

We even saw this  garbage on a recent petition to get NY to go shark fin free. Naturally we didn't sign said petition, like we wouldn't sign a petition from shark finners who claimed that sharks are now growing their fins back. 

In any language or culture, a lie is a lie, made up conservation facts expose the shallowness of the people behind them. Is this a conservation movement or a spiraling media cesspool?


The question begs about the oxy shark myth, so, can we get some freaking shark science here people?

And for those who read in complete sentences, more great stuff  here and even more here.