Nativeshark
In Memoriam
Sea Shepherd terrorists or responsible reef/fish keepers?
Sea Shepherd terrorists or responsible reef/fish keepers?
I agree eco terrorism. If i were on a boat engaging in legal activities, and they moved with aggression as they often do- it would be AK47 time. Open water in the ocean is no place to play games.
Eco-terrorists.
Their advocacy for banning the collection of all fish for the ornamental fish industry in Hawai'i totally ignores the research by biologists from multiple universities and the World Wildlife Fund that shows when areas are protected from collection the yellow tang population goes up to the DETRIMENT of other much less common species (meaning less common species become even rarer, Achilles Tangs being one example). http://files.hawaii.gov/dlnr/reports-to-the-legislature/2010/dar/DAR10-Hawaii-Fisheries-2010.pdf
They are championing an agenda that ignores the research for need of healthy populations of apex preditors ie sharks, to maintain pristine reef ecosystems and the research showing sunscreen is a serious threat to corals. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2291018/
Yes, if you were engaging in legal activities... The issue is that whaling in a sanctuary is not "legal". The Japanese whaling has been ruled ILLEGAL by the International Court of Justice. So in this campaign.. Their aggressive approach is to combat an illegal act.
The International Court of Justice said "While today's ruling did not outlaw the killing of whales for scientific research per se, it categorically stated that Japan's whaling programme in the Southern Ocean was not for scientific purposes, and the amount of whales being killed was not justifiable in the name of science. The court went on to say that Japan must stop issuing permits for this whaling."
Now in their other campaigns such as the Faroe Island Grindstop, you may have a point. This is a legal activity, but if you notice the approach from Sea Shepherd is not as aggressive in this campaign. They do not ram ships, they do not throw things, they hold signs and record the grinds, and steer whales away from the island.. They interfere they do not put anyone in harms way in these campaigns..
Ah okay... And who gives them the right to do what they do? On what juristic base do they act? Sorry, I don't like what the japanese do either. But what SeaS. does is more than unacceptable. They are not the freaking eco police. They don't have the right to ram ships or creating a dangerous situations for the whalers.
Just because they act in international waters tjat doesn't mean they can do what they want.
I deeply hope that this organisation will be forbidden soon and people like Watson have to take responsibility for their actions in front of a court.
If you are legally acting to support conservation and prevent illegal activity, you are ok.
By acting illegally, they are doing the same thing as any other group/person acting illegally. If they don't have to follow the law, then why should the other side of it?