Mention Sea Shepherd (SS) to most people, and it conjures up images of dramatic whaling boat collisions at sea.
Direct action as a means of gaining public attention works – since 1977, this committed group of hardy activists have been frontline defenders of marine life threatened by unsustainable large-scale fishing.
Founder, Captain Paul Watson, has led many high profile campaigns across oceans – many of which were dangerous – in search of whaling and poaching vessels.
But a public and bitter split with the SS board in November 2022 saw the founder booted out of the company he started.
Or as the ABC reported at the time: ‘Depending on the side you’re on, Watson has been forced out by the group he cradled into being, or he’s making a power grab for an organisation that he chose to step away from, and has moved on without him’.
Watson has gone on to start his own organisation: paulwatsonfoundation.org.
Well-known local Sea Shepherd stalwart, Adam Shostack, is clear with whom he supports.
Photo Hans Lovejoy
Loose cannon
When asked what he thinks of Paul Waston’s departure, Shostack told The Echo that ‘Paul is a loose cannon’.
And while Watson inspired Adam to get involved with marine conservation, Shostack sees Watson as a traitor to the cause. ‘Paul likes it his way’, he said.
Chief campaigns officer, Peter Hammarsted, joined the organisation ‘as soon as he was old enough to submit an application’.
He is part of the SS leadership team, and his crew were in Byron Bay last Thursday, as part of a northbound voyage up the east coast by Sea Shepherd’s newest vessel, AllanKay. According to www.seashepherdglobal.org, AllanKay was delivered in February last year, replacing one of the organisation’s four vessels, the Bob Barker.
The former Patagonian toothfish longliner was ‘renamed in honour of Australian couple, Allan and Kay, who donated $5 million to Sea Shepherd Australia for the purpose of buying a new ship’.
Hammarsted told The Echo the ship left Hobart around three weeks ago. ‘We have around 120 crew at sea, which varies, and around 70 per cent of those are vollies’.
In an interview with Paul Watson many years ago, Watson told The Echo at the time he was critical of large environmental groups such as the Sierra Club, and claimed they were more focused on fundraising, rather than getting results from direct action.
Direct action
Watson said their business model was focused on financially supporting its administration, including those who raise funds, while leaving activism in the backseat.
The Echo asked Hammarsted: ‘Given the public fallout with Watson, how is Sea Shepherd positioning itself to be just as relevant as it was under Watson, and will SS continue similar work that was achieved under Watson? Is there a shift in SS operations, and if so, where to?’
Hammarsted replied that SS are still engaged in direct action.
‘Those clashes at sea were absolutely paramount in getting into the public consciousness.
‘You get to a point in time where people know about the issues. People know that overfishing is a problem. People know that climate change is a problem.
‘They know ocean pollution is a problem. And then people need solutions.
‘It’s not enough to raise awareness about an issue.
Effective tactics
‘There needs to be a concrete solution. I believe in choosing the most effective tool or tactic for a particular problem. When it was illegal whaling, we could get into clashes and collisions at sea, because what they were doing was criminal.
‘When we chased the most notorious Patagonian toothfish poacher in the world, a ship that my crew and I chased for 110 days, until it sank off the coast of West Africa, we could pull up their net and cut it open to free the animals. We could take their gear, because they were breaking the law.
‘But when it’s legal fishing vessels, like krill fishing boats, we need to change the law. The law is insufficient. It’s crazy, but it’s true, that it’s perfectly legal for a massive 130m ship to plow through a massive feeding frenzy of whales’.
Hammarsted said SS recently assisted the Gambian government in Africa to arrest eight illegal fishing ships at sea, which could have only occurred because ‘we had the law enforcement support to do it’.
Political will
‘This is a country with the political will for change’, he said.
‘I spent 15 years of my life chasing the factory whaling ships. We know the images, because we saw it on the news.
‘And in 15 years of campaigning down in Antarctica, we saved 6,000 whales, and ultimately raised so much media attention that the Australian government took Japan to the International Court of Justice [which resulted in Japan halting its southern ocean whaling operations].
‘In Liberia, seven years ago, we assisted the Liberian coast guard to arrest one ship that was killing half a million sharks every year.
‘That ship hasn’t fished since. That’s over three million sharks saved to date. We spent 15 years saving 6,000 whales. Yet in one action, working in partnership with government, we’ve been able to save three million and counting.
‘We are in a situation where we need partners and allies. That includes government, and it includes people. There is a bit of misconception that Sea Shepherd, through direct action, shut down whaling in the southern ocean.
‘What we were able to do was put the issue on the political agenda, which resulted in the Australian government taking the Japanese government to court. Whaling there didn’t end because of Sea Shepherd, it was the Australian public. It was businesses and people in Byron Shire, for example, who donated to the cause.
‘We are still doing direct action. Last year, we pulled up 4,000 octopus traps in the Mediterranean. The year before that, we pulled up 8,000 traps.
‘If the most effective thing to do is put our ship between a whaling vessel and a whale, and it is legal for us to do it – we are not a law-breaking organisation – then that’s what we’ll do.
‘When the issue, for example, is illegal fishing in a country, then it makes sense to work with government to stop it’.
As a long time Sea Shepherd supporter, I have now thrown all of my merch in the bin, and left in disgust.
Having become aware of the disruption and conflict that ripped the organisation apart, I emailed Sea Shepherd Australia (several times), New Zealand and Global politely asking for clarification. Particularly of the details of the apparent relationship with Austral Fisheries, which I find very concerning.
None of them responded….ever!
The only conclusion to be drawn is “where there’s smoke, there’s fire”
I’m out!
Adam Shostack to call Paul Watson a traitor is just ridiculous sadly people from the Byron shire still don’t know whats going on with Sea Shepherd and what they are pushing for. Just like the Nimbin Environment Centre which i am flabbergasted they are still selling Sea Shepherd items
Captain Paul Watson Foundation / Neptunes Pirates will crash the Japanese Whalers party down the Southern Ocean at the end of this year
Captain Watson is prepared to face the challenge head-on, & will tour at major Australian ports on his way down to Antarctica
Meanwhile Sea Shepherd does nothing and stands for nothing
Sea Shepherd Global (of whom Sea Shepherd Australia is a chapter of) are definitely no longer the Sea Shepherd I used to support both financially and sometimes materially through food donations when their ships were docked at Williamstown, Melbourne .
It is such a shame what has happened to this movement and the manouvering that went on to transform them into another bog standard NGO and leverage off the name and reputation that Sea Shepherd had as a non violent direct action movement. And there was not one shred of communication or transparency from them whatsoever about any of these changes to those who donate to them financially. To me that shows a complete lack of integrity and an absolute deal breaker for me to provide any continued support.
If you’re still giving money to this organisation, which is no longer the movement you probably think it is, please consider getting informed about what has been happening there in the last few years. It was one hell of an eye opener for me. This post gives some insight into it. You definitely won’t find out this level of detail via Sea Shepherd themselves, even if you ask directly.
This ABC article gives a good insight as a starting point.
https://www.abc.net.au/…/sea-shepherd-paul…/101570694
Sea Shepherd has been commercialized beyond recognition for more than a decade. It traded its true worth for popularity. How can they speak for ocean animals when they now publicly support companies that kill those same animals?
Paul Watson’s new organization remains plagued by the same problems that caused the internal rift. Individuals puffed up with self-importance continue to commercialize the concept of saving ocean animals. Everyone blabs about direct action but who is doing any direct action? No one from either side.
Both sides blame each other and spew propaganda in the guise of news. It’s obvious Watson made compromises for years but decided to no longer do so. Thus this big public blowup. I’m relieved he didn’t keep quiet and continue to go along with selling out. He likely believed the compromises would help expand Sea Shepherd since that’s what Greenpeace and others have done with great success financially. Then he realized it was only killing everything he spent a lifetime to build for the oceans. It took a lot of guts to not give up. But to find his way again, Watson needs to listen deeply to himself and trust his own instincts instead of those who bend his ear and have their own agenda. He needs a crew that can match his courage.
Why didnt they start their own organisation? Paul Watson started his org in 1977 and if they didnt like the direction it was going, Alex Cornelissen, Geert Vons, Jeff Hansen and Peter Hammaerstedt should have just left! Just Disgraceful to oust the Founder
Because Sea Shepherd was well-known. A new group would lack the impressive badass history Sea Shepherd earned in the Seventies and Eighties. It was far easier to hijack what was established and already becoming more mainstream (due to the television show “Whale Wars”). Cooperation between Sea Shepherd and fisheries was inevitable. That was the easiest way to invent the illusion of success against poachers and gain more mainstream acceptance. Sea Shepherd accepted “gifts” from fisheries. It could spend more money on marketing success stories and tee shirts. Clueless donors were happy. In return Sea Shepherd began to endorse the myth of eating sustainable fish so the fisheries could continue business as usual. The fisheries and their customers were happy. Everybody wins, except the fish, dolphins, whales, seabirds, and anyone else trapped in the fishing nets.
I think in the early days Watson took huge risks because he understood the environmental apocalypse that was happening. He did it for the animals and Earth, for no pay and often gambling his own life. He likely hoped society would change so much that he would one day no longer be needed to fight. Even if he had retired a decade ago, his accomplishments would still dwarf whatever guys such as Hammarstedt or Cornelissen could do if they lived a hundred years. Those guys also understand the dire environmental crisis but have given up. They’re trying to only keep up appearances. Hammarstedt might appear heroic now, but history will show otherwise as it always does.
Watson knows real success is temporary and the fight to help ocean animals is perpetual. Whatever his past mistakes or compromises that enabled the hijacking, when push comes to shove he just can’t betray the animals. He’s not made that way. So he’ll fight for them any way he can to the very end. He needs more strong allies the likes of Lamya and Nathalie and shouldn’t settle for less.
If Watson is true to the animals and oceans, winning or losing the battles ultimately won’t matter. It’s his honor and tenacity to do right by the whales that will be remembered and light the way for the next generation of ocean defenders.
Because Sea Shepherd was established and well-known, especially after the TV show “Whale Wars”. It was much easier to change course from within than start over from scratch. This is what has happened to nearly all large conservation groups as they seek to expand and gain mainstream acceptance.
People are waking up to SSG Remember the court case In April 2023 the 4 directors of Sea Shepherd Global (SSG) Alex Cornelissen, Peter Hammarstedt, Geert Vons and Jeff Hansen had initiated a lawsuit against Sea Shepherd France in front of the Paris Judicial Court demanding against the French organization demanding a ban on the use of the Sea Shepherd name and Sea Shepherd emblematic logos created by Captain Paul Watson the accusations against Sea Shepherd France and Paul Watson which were dismissed in March 2024 and Sea Shepherd Global was ordered to pay some $27K to Sea Shepherd France for court costs and not a single word on Sea Shepherd Global or Sea Shepherd Australia Socials
This is what Sea Shepherd Global has become cowardly back-stabbers and thieves No transparency, censorship, and partnerships with seafood companies, insurance companies and corrupt governments.
THE VERDICT
Into the Paris Court they came.
Demanding action on their claim
Cease and desist was their demand,
Sea Shepherd France must be banned.
Having ceased control in a coup.
Having hijacked the ships and crew.
Using donor money to sue.
To control the movement by a few.
The charge of being parasites dismissed.
Geert Vons exposed as a fantasist.
The charge of degradation dismissed.
Sea Shepherd Global got more than a slap on the wrist.
On top of the legal costs they accrued,
To finance this ridiculous feud.
They now have to pay defendant’s bills.
That should give their donors chills.
Justice prevails