Is Sea Shepherd's work productive in the long run?
Paul Watson, and the group Sea Shepherd which he represents, have become infamous in Japan due to their aggressive tactics, not only against Japanese whalers in the Southern Ocean, but also against fishermen who kill huge numbers of sharks for the shark fin trade, and coastal whalers (such as those in the Faroe Islands who hunt small whales that come near their shores). When passing through Frankfort Airport in Germany recently Watson was arrested because he was wanted in Costa Rica for a 10-year-old charge against him for the alleged endangerment of the crew of a fishing boat that was doing illegal shark fishing. He claims that the whole incident was on film and the film shows that the crew of the boat that Sea Shepherd was escorting to port was never in danger. But, he may have to be sent to Costa Rica for trial. He has made many enemies over the years since he and his group have interfered with lucrative business interests. Although I question some of Sea Shepherd's methods, they are good at stirring up controversy, and they have been successful in getting Japan to end its annual whale hunt in the Southern Ocean early. What Sea Shepherd does, brings up the question of whether methods which sometimes put people in danger are justified if it means our oceans and the creatures in them are protected? We also have to ask whether their methods can lead to long term benefit for whales, dolphins, sharks, and the oceans where they live? Or, might Sea Shepherd create resentments--as they seem to have done in Japan--which make people more determined to continue doing what they are doing?
The video embedded below shows the official view of the Japanese government, and unofficial view among some Japanese citizens, of the actions of Sea Shepherd:
No comments:
Post a Comment