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.

Is Japan going to stop killing whales?

I know it's not really about sharks, but wow! How could anyone that cares about anything in the Ocean not be excited about this!

Japan has agreed to stop killing whales in the Antarctic!

The BBC reports that "The UN's International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that the Japanese government must halt its whaling programme in the Antarctic" and states that "Japan said it would abide by the decision but added it "regrets and is deeply disappointed by the decision".

Read the article here!

So hopefully pictures like these are now a thing of the past!

source

I have to say that we as Shark Diver applaud their decision to abide by the ruling of the international court and are "deeply touched by the decision of the court" It's a happy day!

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

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.

Nations fail to agree on curbing Japan whale hunt

AGADIR, Morocco — Japanese officials and environmentalists traded blame Wednesday as nations failed to reach a deal to curb whale hunts by Japan, Norway and Iceland—countries that kill hundreds of whales every year.

The 88 nations of the International Whaling Commission held two days of intense closed-door talks on a proposal to ease the 25-year-old ban on commercial whaling in exchange for smaller kills by the three countries that claim exemptions to the moratorium on hunting for profit.

About 1,500 animals are killed each year by Japan, Norway and Iceland. Japan, which kills the majority of whales, insists its hunt is for scientific research — but more whale meat and whale products end up in Japanese restaurants than in laboratories.

A key sticking point appeared to be that the agency declared a whaling sanctuary in 1994 in the Southern Ocean south of Australia, but Japanese ships hunt freely there because the agency has no enforcement powers.

Australia has already launched a complaint against Japanese whaling at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the U.N.'s highest court.

Acting IWC chairman Anthony Liverpool said in an open meeting Wednesday that "fundamental positions remained very much apart."

Complete Story.

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.

Sea Shepherd - Your Money Wasted at Auction

As the tragic consequences of a failed eco strategy engulfs Sea Shepherd Conservation Society in Australia - with a recent Federal Police boarding and seizure of all material relating to the reality television show Whale Wars - and in Canada with the $800,000 vessel Farley Mowat going to auction, perhaps it is time to rethink the "direct action" eco movement.

The policy of "direct action" fails when direct action fails to adapt.

For many months we have openly decried the near useless tactics of titular head Paul Watson whose messianic vision of saving the planet has delivered a slew of faked press releases, a faked assassination attempt, dead whales, dead seals, and a vessel now up for auction.

The world has changed around Mr.Watson, the media has changed for that matter as well. What worked in the 1970's has all been abandoned by the rest of the NGO community as they have adapted to a changing world. Meanwhile SSCS continue on a path that has now lost its donors close to $2 million dollars this month as the Farley Mowat goes up for auction.

The change that is needed with direct action campaigns must come from the next generation.

Clearly Paul Watson, who decries corporations and greed, is willing to sell his soul to Animal Planet and Whale Wars. While the horrors of whaling take a back seat to a quick cut and edit, we are transported from a dead and dying whale, into a new living room set and an actor selling us pharmaceuticals, advertisements from Chevron, or chemical maker Dow.

Where does Watson and SSCS think the reality television Whale Wars is anything but an eco org being callously used by big media and big corporations? Or has Watson been so co-opted that he fails to even see it?

Watson has run SSCS into the ground. He was come up against an unyielding wall, and his unyielding program is to bash SSCS against the wall and continue to bash SSCS against the wall until the org shatters. Step one, the loss of the Farley Mowat to a back drop of a continued seal slaughter. This is a tragedy that could have been avoided.

The next generation needs to be savvy, they need to foster new media. Most critically they need to stand alone, clear of one man and his policies, whose time has come to an end. The future of conservation is in the hands of everyone.

Send your money to where it counts and not to an eco org that trades your dollars for advertising on prime time and spectacular financial losses at the end of an auctioneers gavel.

Sea Shepherd - Faked Whale Media $$

Wagging the Conservation Dog

Did SSCS fabricate a sperm whale rescue story for Nine News - MSN?

We have talked a lot about Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and their efforts after 31 years to save whales.

While SSCS "devoted" claim their eco org is legitimate and actually saves animals acting as the guardians of wildlife, we maintain they have devolved into little more than a media machine that has gone off the rails, trading your hard won eco dollars for faked press releases and even less credible reality television shows.

SSCS media output has become so abjectly dishonest and fanciful that we're not surprised many governments and blogs like this one are taking a stance against Wagging the Conservation Dog for continued ineffective eco results.

Case in point - Where was the Steve Irwin Jan 22.2009?

If you ask Sea Shepherd’s National Director for Research, Ness Pearce, the Steve Irwin was off the coast of Tasmania on the site of a horrific sperm whale stranding, with actual whale saving equipment on board. This weeks major media story from Australia and Sea Shepherd becomes even more poignant as Ms.Pearce goes on to say:

Sea Shepherd members travelled on their ship Steve Irwin to a mass beaching of more than 50 sperm whales on the Tasmania's northwest coast on January 22 — but they were told their help wasn't needed despite carrying marine scientists and expert whale-saving equipment on board.

"When we arrived there on the Steve Irwin, we found about eight guys standing around with nothing but a bucket and a hose," Ms Pearce said. "We asked if we could help and they said, 'No thanks, we're fine'." The crew members claim to have witnessed one man dismembering a dead whale with a chainsaw just metres from another that was still alive, causing the live mammal even more distress and suffering.

Faked News?

This actual quote and first hand reporting from Ms.Pearce makes for great news. Reading this one comes to the conclusion that Sea Shepherd cares about whales, is always there to help, and even carries around "expert whale saving gear". Additionally the local Park service employees (read local government) are put in a completely negative light after telling Sea Shepherd crew members "their help was not needed" not to mention the shady reference to the man with the chainsaw.

Now let's look at this same story from an actual Sea Shepherd blog post written by Shannon Mann, Merryn Redenbach and Wietse Van Der Werf. Here's what they say about the same stranding January 22.2009 complete with on site images of just three SSCS members milling about many dead whales laying on the sand. They also document where the Steve Irwin was at the time Sea Shepherd’s National Director for Research claims in a first hand report it was off the coast of Tasmania at the sperm whale stranding:

Two days after we had waved off the Steve Irwin and its courageous crew, and as the ship again set sail for the icy waters of Antarctica (saving whales from Japanese hunters), we read in the Tasmanian papers about the mass stranding of sperm whales on Tasmania's north coast. We decided to hit the road and cross the island, hoping to arrive in time to assist the rescue operation in whatever way we could. While we organised a vehicle and downloaded news articles about the incident, we learned the full extent of the situation. Fifty female sperm whales were stranded on a sandbank off Perkins Island near Smithton, a small town on the very North Western corner of Tasmania. It was one of the biggest standings of its kind in Tasmania's history and with the size of the animals and the remote location, it was evident the rescue of the remaining live whales would be a daunting task.

Clearly these two media takes on the same event are wildly different. In fact there's no mention of Ms.Pearce even physically being at the stranding event, yet she is the voice of whale conservation authority in the media. The SSCS National Director for Research coverage of this event for the major media is filled with eco excellence, bravado, whale saving equipment, and the actual vessel Steve Irwin. Unfortunately the entire eco story was absolutely fabricated - classic Wagging the Conservation Dog. For what?

Your Money

Your money is important to the ongoing and unfortunately, global efforts, to roll back environmental disasters and unsustainable fisheries. Hundreds of NGO's are literally begging for donations to get serious and lasting work done. As we discovered first hand, donations to SSCS only Wag the Conservation Dog and do little to help move agendas forward or work with disparate groups for long term solutions.

SSCS has had 31 years to effect change. Faked eco news is the best they now have to offer the global eco movement.

If you want your donations to work, ensure whoever you donate to is transparent and can show metrics for success not just massaged eco news clips that cash in on the horror's of dead whales, seals, and sharks to fund more of the same.

Demand more from your eco org.

Editors Note: In the interests of fairness one might argue that the woman portrayed in the major media this week as SSCS National Director for Research is in fact a local, radicalized eco loon, who was pretending to the part of the SSCS organization. We cannot fathom how this woman could get the basic facts of a horrific whale stranding so wrong while actual boots on the ground told a completely different story of three well meaning "whale stranding media parachuters" who wanted to help, but realized they were late, without the equipment needed,the finances, or the manpower to effect any change at all.

Given the many bogus news events pumped out by SSCS over the past year - from faked assassination claims to hostage taking events, who knows what the real story is.

Suffice to say whatever SSCS says about it these days, they are probably dead wrong.

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.

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.

Sea Shepherd Whale Wars-Sinking to New Depths

Observing Sea Shepherd these days is like watching the last days of any long running television series. The final shows are just tragically anemic versions of the original.

And so it goes with Sea Shepherd whose messaging has seemingly become more important than actual boots on the ground efforts.

Case in point the heroically poor "performance art" that is the ongoing Antarctic Whale Defense Campaign. While accomplishing very little in 2008 the entire campaign did manage to globally embarrass the NGO community at large this spring and was punctuated by a series of high seas stunts culminating in the "Fabrication heard round the world" that of Paul Watson being shot by Japanese Whalers.

As a point of order we are strongly against whaling of any kind and do not side with nor condone the Japanese "scientific whaling" in any form.

Now it turns out the eco-antics of the 2008 whale season were driven in some part by an on board film crew who are now launching a 7 episode series called Whale Wars on Animal Planet.

Animal Planet's programming is known for "reality style" television, plot driven with little focus towards facts. It is little surprise that Watson chose this programming outlet to team up with.

Allowing a reality televsion film crew to essentially direct eco protests is a new low for Sea Shepherd and highlights a rudderless organization whose primary eco focus has been turned into "big media at any costs".

To say that Sea Shepherd has strayed off the NGO reservation is an understatement and for those camp followers who think this is a good thing it is not.

Eco enforcement is serious work-not stunt work-and those few that heed the call to the world of front line eco protest are professionals-not reality television stage actors-for a television series whose mandate is ratings and not long lasting and effective action.