J-adventures bla bla
praising, ranting, raving all about me being here. To read any further you must hereby understand, the following is an expression of my opinions and feelings at the moment of posting. It does not necessarily reflect my veritable mindset.

Whale Retards - The ultimate incompetence!

I started watching and now have completely watched season 1-2 of Whale Wars. At first I supported the drastic actions the Sea Shepherds took, I wanted to support them. However the more I watched the less I supported their actions and the more I found myself routing for the whalers. The tactics the Sea Shepherds use has turned me off. Talk about completely frustrating to watch such an overly dramatic show, overly dramatic editing, and generally a stupid show which detracts from the cause it purports to support.


I can't get over how disorganised and reckless the sea shepherds are. Here are some examples but not limited to: going against commands, mixing up commands, getting unnecessary injured, screwing up missions on countless occasions, getting lost at sea, blindly launching flares into the sky and disregarding the heli pilots "use caution" message, jumping onto an iceberg, having the Steve Irwin navigating ice fields when they clearly know the ship is not ice worthy and of course lying about getting shot.

Watson's credibility is poor at best, yet the media loves his lies. Lying gets ratings. Lying sells.
Wiki Sea shepherds
Watson's public relations savvy is shown in an episode of Whale Wars when he creates an international media "storm" after two crewmembers are detained on a Japanese whaling vessel.[25] In his book, Earthforce!, Watson advises readers to make up facts and figures when they need to, and to deliver them to reporters confidently.[5] He also states that the "truth is irrelevant" due the nature of mass media.[26] In response to criticism that he manipulates the media, Watson has stated: "What we do is provide the media with the kind of stories they can't resist... and this is how we bring attention to what's happening to the whales, the seals, the sharks and the other marine conservation campaigns we're involved in."[27] A whaling industry insider said of Sea Shepherds public relations strategy: "Even when they cause a collision, they simply say 'The Japanese hit us.'"

Hiring professionals would cost more but would get the job done and waste less resources, time and viewer patience. Professionals have careers to lose doing illegal activities, whereas volunteers don't for the most part.

The sea shepherds are completely careless and disregard their own safety, logic and morals. If there is no more ship then there is no more 'saving the whales'.

The dialogue usually over-exaggerated but also priceless. "Today after they killed a whale, the day has definitely changed for me" "I can't believe they killed a whale in front of us" "it's not supposed to be like this". Umm they are following WHALERS, what exactly did they expect?
Countless times they mention how if the crew is not ready to die for the whales then they shouldn't be aboard yet when the LRADs are pointed at the heli pilot the Whalers have no respect for human life and are careless? Doesn't that come with the territory? All of a sudden the bravado disappeared. Throwing anything on someone else's ship would also be considered dangerous.

Why don't they ever use the whaler's tactics and jam the radio signals, or even listen to their conversations? Can't they get their own LRADs? Water canons? (they have finally in season 3, 2009-10)
At the very least they could create new tactics devices to help out. Yet no change happens. Perhaps only when the ratings sag will they change.


Though I applaud the ideology of attempting stop the immediate whaling. However I believe they are not effective in doing so and should learn from their mistakes/failed tactics as do the whalers.

No matter how many times they repeat that the whalers are illegally killing whales, in truth they are not, as the narrator often mentions the scientific research clause in the 86 IWC moratorium.
If anyone is to blame it is the IWC itself. the IWC wanted membership and wanted to please everyone so it's best to have everyone talking rather than going their separate ways.
I.e. whaling countries are allowed self imposed research killing quotas and are permitted to sell the by-products.

Quote from IWC Convention
'Notwithstanding anything contained in this Convention any Contracting Government may grant to any of its nationals a special permit authorizing that national to kill, take and treat whales for purposes of scientific research subject to such restrictions as to number and subject to such other conditions as the Contracting Government thinks fit, and the killing, taking, and treating of whales in accordance with the provisions of this Article shall be exempt from the operation of this Convention. Each Contracting Government shall report at once to the Commission all such authorizations which it has granted. Each Contracting Government may at any time revoke any such special permit which it has granted.'

Because IWC membership is voluntary once membership is withdrawn there is not even a shred of "breaking" any rules, regulations, laws.

Wiki Quote
'IWC is a voluntary international organisation and is not backed up by treaty. Therefore, the IWC, in essence, is a voluntary organisation which has substantial practical limitations on its authority. First, any member countries are free to simply leave the organisation and declare themselves not bound by it if they so wish. Second, any member state may opt out of any specific IWC regulation by lodging a formal objection to it within 90 days of the regulation coming into force.'
As for the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary as Japan objected to the regulation and opted out of it does that mean they are allowed to commercially whale in this area? Regardless it was deemed that this area needed more research put in to it.
In any case the IWC did mention a quota of 2000 kills would be the limit for whale sustainability, of which the Japanese whalers take just under half usually.

Sure many people may see past the legal smoke screen but that is besides the point. Legal is legal. The captain may use some kind of UN Nature law to justify his actions. But that is equal to using the right to freedom of speech/expression to threaten another.
The Steve Irwin and the Sea Shepherds need to know to skirt the laws in all legality or use the law as the Japanese do to truly bring the game onto a level playing field.


In the end I believe that the Steve Irwin and the Sea Shepherds are indeed eco-terrorists and pirates blinded by the western notion of saving whales because they are somehow more special than kangaroos or cows. Although only some kinds of whales are endangered, I'm under the impression that most people think all whales are, furthermore I would guess that most people object to the actual act of killing seen as cruel (duck hunting or animal trapping anyone?), but nature is often the more cruel killer.
Regarless, the fault lies with the IWC member countries. They should have formed a more legally binding NGO with economic penalties if they truly sought to protect. (Penalties for going over quota or penalties for acts of whaling interference) A middle ground should be struck with the aim of compromises by all parties. It's not perfect but it would be a far better start than the status quo. Lastly, as the whalers are virtually the sole whalers left on the planet, it is obviously in their best interest not to over-whale therefore keeping a sustainable level.

Institute of Cetacean Research
Institute of Cetacean Research - Q&A about Japanese Whaling
International Whaling Commission
Wikipedia (whaling)
Wikipedia Sea shepherds
Wikipedia Watson
Sea Shepherds