Once Upon a Time in a Whale Sanctuary
ed two stories that changed his life forever. At ten
Once Upon a Time in a
Whale Sanctuary
L
istening to Paul Watson is a beautiful expe-
rience in life. It’s easy to be captivated by an
old gray-haired man telling a story about
the oceans and how he and his non-governmen-
tal organization, the Sea Shepherd Conservation
Society, are trying to combat the power of evil by
saving whales. During a skype conversation at
TEDxNoosa, he never breaks the flow showing
confidence and knowledge about everything that
intensifies his cause. His speech is a constant call
to action with the intent to have more people in-
volved in this heroic ideal. Some of his phrases
are powerful thoughts expressing the importance
for what he called “laws of ecology” and these
are: diversity, interdependence and biological re-
sources. He goes deep in this reality by saying that
“we are simply eating the oceans alive” referring
to the use of 40% of fish taken from the seas to
feed chickens and satisfy the meat industry. To
Brita Belli in the discontinued E-Magazine, Paul
refers that plastic pollution, heavy metal pollu-
tion or acidification are other big threats to the
ecosystem; but meanwhile his biggest concern is
the fight from Sea Shepherd against Japan, the
country where eating whale meat maintains a tra-
dition even if these species are close to extinction.
Nevertheless, everything that characterizes Sea
Shepherd reflects principles imposed from him,
highlighted by an uncompromising compassion;
making them so effective establishing important
positive habits to the conservation of this planet.
P aul Franklin Walter, a 65 year old Canadian,
was born to make the difference with his in-
terventionist methods targeted to change the na-
ture of the fishing industry. The events of his life
showed how particular he was; and in a conver-
sation with the author Michael Shapiro for the
Earth Island Journal back in 2010, Watson narrat-
tiagocosta.photography I
years of age, Watson was living in a fishing village
called St. Andrews in Canada, a place known for
its beavers. Sadly one day, he understood that all
the beavers had disappeared; the excess hunting
of trappers made him angry, and he decided to do
something. His first eco-adventures started when
he decided to free animals from the traps and de-
stroy these ambushes. At Greenpeace, by the first
years of the organization in 1975, Watson was 24
years old when one of the most memorable mo-
ments of his life occurred. He was with Bob Hunt-
er, another co-founder, in the coast of Eureka,
California, when they decided to ride a small boat
in front of a 150-foot Soviet harpoon vessel. Their
purpose was to impede the hunting action by put-
ting themselves between the harpoon and a group
of whales. Unfortunately, the captain from the big
boat paid no importance to their actions and gave
orders to shoot. That moment could have been
the last day of their lives; they were in a critical
position when the harpoon was shot and it nearly
hit them before reaching one of the whales. Wat-
son explains “She screamed and rolled over in a
fountain of blood. [...] As I looked into that eye, I
saw something which really changed my life. [...]
(the whale) could have killed us but she chose not
do so, so I feel personally indebted to that whale.
That’s one of the reasons I’ve dedicated my life to
protecting whales” (Shapiro 51-52).
I
n fact, all of this uncompromising compassion
shown by Paul Watson is the keystone habit
necessary to provoke changes in others patterns.
Keystone habits are explained by Charles Duhigg
in the book the Power of Habit as the skill to “relies
on identifying a few key priorities and fashioning
them into powerful levers” (101). In the book, Paul
O’Neill is the man behind this keystone habits
and the change of the perspective inside the Al-
coa company. In this corporation, workers dealt
with heavy metal material problems, and when
O’Neill turned a CEO, he understood sooner that
by establishing a strong safety habit, he could
boosted the efficiency he was looking for to take
the company to the success (98-101). In the Sea
Once Upon a Time in a Whale Sanctuary
Shepherd, safety is a smaller concern compared
to the keystone habits promoted by Watson since
his early days. Those habits are characterized by
an evident compassion that helped Paul Watson
to establish Greenpeace, Sea Shepherd, and gen-
erate ideological change around his heroic ideal.
W atson co-founded Greenpeace in 1970, with
the objective to fight against nuclear test-
ing in U.S.-Canadian border (Belli 22), but quick-
ly they saw themselves in other missions around
the globe. The excessive passion from Watson in
interventionist actions set him in a confrontation
position inside the organization (Belli 22) and in
1977, in a mission by his hand, after they sank a
whaling ship in Iceland, he was considered an
embarrassment to the organization for being
“reprehensible and irresponsible” (Shapiro 52). As
a consequence, Watson left Greenpeace and since
then they’ve been collecting insults from one
side to another. Greenpeace says that Paul Wat-
son is violent and an eco-terrorist. He responds
by saying that the “bear witness” that character-
izes Greenpeace in fact is cowardice, a contrast
to the bravery characterized by Watson. For him,
Greenpeace is a submissive organization while
Sea Shepherd is an interventionist organization.
He does what he does for whales and other crea-
tures of the sea calling them his clients (Shapiro
53). Although, both are against Japan and illegal
industries.
W ith the uncompromising compassion al-
ways present in his personality, Watson
didn’t took too much time, and founded Sea
Shepherd in 1977. His main mission to combat
Japanese whaling vessels in the Antarctic Whale
Sanctuary (Stuart, Thomas, Donaghue, Russell
753), and quickly this organization turned into the
number one world’s enemy to Japan. They argue
that Japan is violating international laws from the
International Whaling Commission (IWC) by go-
ing in the sanctuary and killing hundreds of this
species every year. Japan says that all of the hunt-
ing is for scientific purposes, and because almost
any country is opposed to Japan, Sea Shepherd
feels the obligation to do this job. At TEDxNoosa
Watson claims, “we have to protect our oceans. If
the oceans die, we die. We don’t live on this plan-
et with a dead ocean” concluding “we’re doing
this for the benefit of all future generations and
all species, and if we don’t win, everybody loses”.
These actions are not only instruments to meet
pragmatic needs, they are expressive and essen-
tial to create social and political change; and for
Watson, whales are the most important species in
our oceans (Stuart, Thomas, Donaghue, 753).
T he Institute for Cetacean Research (ICR) is a
Japanese organization created with the sup-
port of Japan government. Claimed as a “unique”
group, “specializing in biological and social sci-
ences related to whales”, they argue that part of
their activities serve to examine the consumption
of fish by whales, with the romantic goal to im-
prove the maritime resources management of all
living species (Overview). Using the article VII
from the International Convention for the Regu-
lation of Whaling as a defense backup, they claim
that “whale research programs are processed and
sold within Japan under guidance of the Japanese
government and the proceeds of the sale are used
to cover a portion of the research costs” (Over-
view). Although, it’s strange that from 2005 this
country has published only two scientific journals
related to whales. The fishing tradition is big and
for some Japanese citizens, ending this tradition
is killing the culture; for some reason, the truth
is revealed when facts tells that Japanese govern-
ment subsidizes with around $10M per year, as
shown in data from the International Fund for
Animal Welfare (Hinckley).
T here’s an international discussion about this
topic and in 2014 the advance was meaning-
ful when Australia (with a later support from New
Zealand) took Japan to the International Court of
Justice (ICJ). Later, ICJ found that Japan had vi-
olated three provisions of the International Con-
vention of the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW):
“the moratorium on commercial whaling, the ban
on factory ships, and the prohibition on whal-
tiagocosta.photography II
 Once Upon a Time in a Whale Sanctuary

ing in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary” but Japan
refused the decision and continues arguing the
Article VII “for purposes of scientific research”
(Plant 40-41). All this short success was gained
with the perseverance from Sea Shepherd and
how this movement created an alarm discussion
worldwide; and well-adjusted to their effective
success is the propaganda promoted by the TV
show, Whale Wars, on the Animal Planet channel.
the helicopter blade movement, sounds from the
sea, the waves and the wind, or radio communi-
cations. Besides that, in the organization main
website there’s a merchandising of clothes and
different types of accessories; there’s a blog with
updates about their missions; and also very im-
portant, social media is always an active tool with
new events and it’s a place where the fans can give
a close support; Paul Watson also has books about

W hale Wars is probably the biggest growest him and the organization.
contributor for the movement created by
Sea Shepherd; being the representation for all W hale Wars shows what international gov-
ernments apparently can’t see. During
the actions established by this organization in the many years several governments joined to plan
whale sanctuary. This TV show pretends to doc- different regulations, and defend places in the
ument the interventions of this organization in world that are not in the territory of a single coun-
the Antarctic Sea by showing how they fight the try. Most of these places are oceans. The pretext
Japanese whaling vessels. It follows Shepherd’s was to work for the conservation, as well as es-
missions, winnings and failures. By watching to tablish rules for those who navigate, especially
the series it’s easy to forget that everything it’s real. to regulate safety and fishing activities. Some of
Whales are an important member in the cast but this regulations are present in the United Nations
all the drama happens between humans (Robé Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the
96). Japanese elements are the villains who play Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts
a mysterious unseen character because they are Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (SUA),
filmed just from a zoom lenses, just from the Sea the Convention of the International Regulations
Shepherd’s ship. In the Shepherd’s cast different for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGS) or
actors could represent different actions, but Paul the International Convention for the Regulation
Watson is the one who plays the main role. He’s of Whaling (ICRW); but for Sea Shepherd, all of
the patriarch who assumes the command of the these regulations are harmless sentences because
structure (Robé 100). He’s the wise old man that almost any country can effectively prevent other
it’s always ready to fight, despite being always countries to fulfilling the law. For different occa-
calm advising his pupils. sions, Watson affirms that when politicians get to-

E verything started in 2007 when Animal Planet gether, they don’t decide or improvise anything in
was looking for a new series with human-in- the benefit of this planet. He argues systematical-
terest stories to raise the station viewers. In 2008, ly, that political and economical interests are big-
the actually series was in air to the public eye and ger, and the multiple questions about the conser-
in twelve months, the audience from the channel vation of the oceans stays always in a second plan.
increased fifteen percent and it turn this the most- That’s why many single activists and non-govern-
watched show on internet (Robé 94). Whale Wars mental groups introduce this issues into the mass
series on TV rolls an important detail that gave to media discussion and allow the general popula-
Sea Shepherd almost all the influence they have tion to understand and contest their governmen-
today. But there’s more. In 2013, they launched an tal elite. If this happens in a bigger scale, they are
unique interactive website called “Blood and Wa- automatically changing the habits from govern-
ter” where the viewer can feel all the environment ments and how they look to this green causes.
created on the series; there’s ambient sound from

tiagocosta.photography III
Once Upon a Time in a Whale Sanctuary

I n the consequence of the extreme actions from

Sea Shepherd, ICR accused them from pira-
cy, one of the oldest crimes in the international
criminal law (Honniball 1), and taking them to
the Ninth Circuit, a Federal Court with appellate
jurisdiction over district courts. Piracy is defined
by UNCLOS as the “illegal acts of violence or de-
tention, or any act of depredation, committed for
private ends by the crew or the passenger of a pri-
vate ship [...] against another ship, or against per-
of this illegal fishing tool. Driftnets were famous
for being effective for the industry in terms of the
quantity of fish taken in the nets. Although, this
technique showed completely destructive for the
oceans and in 1992 the UN banned and turned it
illegal (Operation Driftnet). Many vessels still use
this technique, especially in a time where in the
oceans there’s less fish quantity, and the necessi-
ty to make money is bigger than the preservation
concerning.

sons or property” (Alien). Although, as in many
discussions in universal jurisdiction, many laws
still undefined and unclear. Like the understand-
ing of what is “private ends” in the international
crime and how many countries can interpreted it
in a different way. For one side, could be advocate
that “private ends” means a political direction and
motivation. For another, there’s a different view
saying that “private ends” stands for public goals.
However, countries struggle to define “public”
and all this discussions winding up in a conver-
sation without end (Honniball 3-4). For US Court
of Appeals, acts of piracy done for private ends
are “public” and could not be considered “taken
on behalf of a state”, but for Sea Shepherd “the
(supreme) court ignored a wealth of authority
that indicates its interpretation of ‘private ends’ is
erroneous--and [...] is not ‘universally’ accepted”
(Honniball 4-5). The judgement ended in a par-
adox and the Court recommended the case to be
assigned to a different judge.
T
his is the negative cycle that Sea Shepherd
are pledging to change. Today the movement
created by Paul Watson is bigger enough to live in-
dependently under the command of his captains.
To add to that, Sea Shepherd is supported by a
mass movement where just on Facebook, they
collect almost one million followers. Spreading
his bravery shown by his uncompromised com-
passion principles, Paul Watson always knew that
to change ecological habits he needs to surround
Sea Shepherd with public support because that’s
the only way they can face the governments and
the industry turning their business an economic
failure, leading this hunting traditions to the real
extinction.

E verything looks complex and bureaucratic in

the politicians world, but for Sea Shepherd
and Paul Watson everything is simple. Simple as
motivate a group of people to enter into a ship
and go travel around the world, make themselves
look as heroines who fight the bad guys. Nowa-
days, Sea Shepherd has campaigns to prevent
bluefin tuna in Mediterranean Sea, campaigns to
protect dolphins in Japan and Solomon Islands,
and dozens of campaigns around the world to
protect seals, sea lions, turtles, sharks, reefs, etc.
One of their most recent campaigns it’s called
“Operation Driftnet” where in the South Indian
Ocean they are trying to expose the consequences
tiagocosta.photography IV
 Once Upon a Time in a Whale Sanctuary

References
TEDx Talks. “If our oceans die, we die | Captain Paul Watson
| TEDxNoosa” Online video clip. Youtube, 25 Jun. 2015. Web.
26 Mar. 2016.
Belli, Brita. “Defender Of The Seas.” E: The Environmental
Magazine 23.1 (2012): 18-25. Academic Search Premier. Web.
1 Mar. 2016.
Blair, Gavin. “Japan’s ‘scientific’ whaling season delayed, Sea
Shepherd claims responsibility.” Christian Science Monitor
Dec. 2010: N.PAG. Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 Mar. 2016.
Rutherford, Stephanie. “Captain Paul Watson: Interview
With A Pirate.” BC Studies 183 (2014): 179-180. Academic
Search Premier. Web. 1 Mar. 2016.
Shapiro, Michael. “Paul Watson.” Earth Island Journal 25.3
(2010): 51-53. Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 Mar. 2016.
Stuart, Avelie, Emma Thomas, Ngaire Donaghue and Adam
Russell. “’We May Be Pirates, But We Are Not Protesters’:
Identity In The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.” Po-
litical Psychology 34.5 (2013): 753-777. Academic Search Pre-
mier. Web. 1 Mar. 2016.
“Overview and Purpose”. The Institute of Cetacean Research.
The Institute of Cetacean Research, 2011. Web. 10 Apr. 2016.
Plant, Brendan. “Sovereignty, Science, And Cetaceans: The
Whaling In The Antarctic Case.” Cambridge Law Journal
74.1 (2015): 40-44. Academic Search Premier. Web. 22 Mar.
2016.
“Alien Tort Statute.” International Law Update 19.(2013): 2-4.
Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 Mar. 2016.
Story Hinckley, Staff. “Almost nobody in Japan eats whale.
Why is whaling so important to Japan?” Christian Science
Monitor Dec. 2015: N.PAG. Academic Search Premier. Web.
22 Mar. 2016.
Honnibal, Arron. “The ‘Private Ends’ of International Piracy:
The Necessity of Legal Clarity in Relation to Violent Politi-
cal Activists” International Crimes Database. International
Crimes Database, 2015. Web.
“Campaigns”. Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. Sea
Shepherd Conservation Society, 2016. Web. 13 Apr. 2016.
“Confronting Illegal Driftnets in the Indian Ocean” Opera-
tion Driftnet. Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, 2016. Web.
13 Apr. 2016.

tiagocosta.photography V