The Pew Ocean Real Estate Portfolio: The Real Shark
Con
I continued to ask the question: why was the charitable foundation of an
oil corporation funding shark conservation? Those within shark
conservation who had until then at least been willing to have a dialogue
clammed up. It was like an elephant was in the room.
Finally
I was sent two links; one from Nils E Stolpe, who wrote about
commercial fishing in the US, who detailed how Pew had funded SeaWeb and
how in turn SeaWeb had changed negative public perception from oil
companies to fisheries.
But
it was when I read the second link from 'The Fisherman' internet forum,
by a poster calling themselves 'mightyj', that the penny finally
dropped. Only it was more like a bag of spanners diving headlong down
the stairs from the top of a lighthouse.
Back
in 2003 the Pew Charitable Trusts called for a National Ocean Policy
for the US outer continental shelf. The policy they wrote became law and
placed the Trust in majority control of the Joint Oceans Commission,
the body that administers and effectively controls ocean policy in the
US.
Top of the 'to do' list was zoning large areas of sea floor for the
purpose of leasing them to corporations for energy production, wind
farms, fish farming, and bio-prospecting.
The
money from this rent goes to the science they favour, which in turn can
be used to drive their agenda. It's seemingly a very clever way of
rapidly privatising the ocean and effectively becoming the sea's
landlord, everything generating complimentary momentum.
Source: http://blog.through-the-gaps.co.uk/2012/11/the-real-shark-con-controlling-our-seas.html
Friday, 1 January 2021
The Pew Ocean Real Estate Portfolio: The Real Shark
The Real Shark Con, Controlling Our Seas, And Other Stories - PEW Trust -
The Real Shark Con, Controlling Our Seas, And Other Stories
There
was something fishy about shark conservation from the start; the
re-branding of a charismatic man eater, the crisis they faced, and the
self righteous finger pointing at the villains responsible for their
impending demise.
The closer one looked at the hyperbolic claims, the murkier the waters
became. Straight question? No answer. Just a calendar offer. Challenge
claims unsubstantiated by any scientific evidence? Named and shamed as
someone intent on discrediting shark conservation.
With hindsight, 'shark con's' flirtation with self-destruction was way
beyond my scepticism and imagination. And way beyond the troops they
rallied for the cause.
A Few Words About The Pew Charitable Trusts
Founded
by the children of Joseph N. Pew, CEO of the Sun Oil Company, (Sunoco),
the Pew Charitable Trusts have donated millions to numerous charitable
organisations that share the Pew family's philosophy and beliefs in
education, religion, medicine and social welfare. They also donate to
environmental groups.
Sunoco
is considered an environmental leader in the oil and gas industry.
And Pew believe they can help to solve the nation's problems. That
nation being the USA.
The Shark Trust in the UK are just one of 85 NGOs who receive funding
from Pew, as part of the Shark Alliance, which Pew formed.
When
the various NGOs need to meet up, Pew pays for the flights.
Understandably the benefactor expects the various environmental groups
within the Shark Alliance to toe their party line, else lose their
funding.
It's been alleged that Pew funded rival groups to compete with any
dissenters, consequently when the dust settled from the infighting,
those still standing were in Pew's corner.
There's
no evidence this happened, but the practice of manufacturing rival
pseudo groups for a punch up is well known within PR. Such groups are
known as 'AstroTurf'. Because the grass roots aren't real.
The
important thing to remember here is that Pew are the biggest hitter in
shark conservation, and they're an American charitable foundation
created from an American oil corporation.
The
obvious question is: why is an American oil company channelling dollars
to save sharks?
Scuba divers are natural ambassadors for sharks. They actively want to
see them in their natural habitat, consequently they're major advocates
for shark conservation. So I asked them the question. The answer I
received from the self confessed cynics was that it was a strategy to
improve the oil company's image.
And there's nothing wrong with that.
Greenwashing
Greenwashing
was identified by New York environmentalist Jay Westervelt in the
1980's, in response to the hotel industry promoting the re-use of towels
to help save the planet, and to show hotels cared. Westervelt found
that the reality was few hotels made efforts towards helping the
environment, but the green sheen increased their profit. Less towels to
wash less often saved them money. It wasn't whitewashing. It subtler
than that.
Oil
corporations who've reinvented themselves as energy corporations, are
keen to push their environmental credentials. Possibly the best known
example is BP, British Petroleum, who developed their 'Beyond Petroleum'
tag line from their initials, suggesting their commitment to
renewables.
They
changed their company logo to the eco-friendly yellow and green
sunburst.
Pew were not just the benevolent green face of Sunoco. They got busy,
founding SeaWeb, 'the only international, non-profit organisation
dedicated to strategically communicating about ocean issues.'
One
of the first things SeaWeb did was commission a survey to discover
which ocean issue would best engage the public.
The results told SeaWeb that 81% of Americans thought oil spills were a
very serious problem. Overfishing on the other hand wasn't considered a
very serious problem, and was bundled with 'loss of critical species' to
even register as a meaningful indicator of trouble.
Yet when SeaWeb reviewed the poll in their November 1996 update, the
only specific threat mentioned was overfishing. "71% agree that
overfishing is threatening the health and stability of the marine
environment." Oil spills didn't get a mention.
Negative
attention was diverted from oil companies to the patsy of fisheries,
The important thing to remember here? Oil companies were to blame in the
minds of the public. Until they were told the problem was overfishing.
Source: http://blog.through-the-gaps.co.uk/2012/11/the-real-shark-con-controlling-our-seas.html
Twiggys Marine Park Agenda - Fracking, Gas, Oil - Kimberley - Andrew Forrest
Dear Ms Barnes
INTRODUCTION
I write to provide my submission on the draft marine park management plans that were
released by the Australian Government for comment, on 21st July 2017.
This submission largely builds on my previous discussions and correspondence to you as
it appears that rather than progressing our marine park network and improving
protection, the draft plans amount to significant backward steps.
As a proud West Australian, I have a deep and lasting connection to the land and the sea.
My home state, Western Australia, boasts many iconic marine areas with teeming
biodiversity and to place their future in peril would be a shameful stain on this nation’s
environmental legacy to future generations.
My appreciation and respect for our marine environment has led me to undertake
extensive doctoral studies in marine biology: I have conducted doctoral research at four
of the Commonwealth Marine Parks in Western Australia: Gascoyne CMP, Perth Canyon
CMP, Geographe CMP and the Bremer Canyon CMP
Source media: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fd_hvost9JTioc7nJRhMfSTUo02Kasoz/view?fbclid=IwAR0eFHARxt3pQqypdfbd9MYovvRJCfIcPm76p4uy2pJRwpATKxU177XrbKI
Aggregator Tags only: Buru. Energy, Kerry Stokes, Andrew Forrest, Jessica Meeuwig, Seven West Media. Fracking. Eric Streitberg. Mark McGowan, University of Western Australia, Minderoo Foundation.
Source media: https://www.facebook.com/APFisherman/posts/1805856719530844
Aggregator tags only: The Real Shark Con, Controlling Our Seas, And Other Stories By H.E. Sawyer
www.hesawyer.com
Jessica Meeuwigs Kimberly Gas Fracking Connection The Media - Andrew Forrest, Eric Streightberg, Kerry Stokes - Western Australia
Australian Professional Fisherman
@APFisherman · Community
Jessica And The Frackers. Jessica Meeuwigs Kimberly Gas Fracking Connection The Media Is Definitely NOT Telling You About
Imagine your name was Eric Streitberg and you headed an oil and gas exploration company called Buru Energy which is using the "fracking" technique to explore for gas in the Kimberley.
Now, go and google "Buru Energy fracking" and see how many results come up. From the ABC, 10th September, 2015,
"The company first used the controversial hydraulic rock fracturing technique — commonly referred to as fracking — in 2010 at their Yulleroo gas field, 60 kilometres east of Broome.The 2010 fracking did not attract public attention at the time, but Buru Energy has since risen to prominence with a dramatic rise and fall on the Australian stock market, and major investor and political agreements....The latest round of fracking took place in Buru's Asgard and Valhalla wells near the remote Noonkanbah Aboriginal community."
Buru Energy are very sensitive about scrutiny of their actions as evidenced by this quote,
"West Australia Greens MP Robin Chapple said he was disappointed Buru Energy did not provide more information about their fracking program, claiming the company only released the information publically after environmentalists flew over the site and took photos of the equipment.
"I've had some agreement with Mr Streitberg that we would have an open and honest discussion around these sorts of issues, but obviously they've been doing this very covertly," Mr Chapple said.
"I'm disappointed that it was actually the photos that we got a hold of that showed the fracking taking place, that has initiated the comment on the stock exchange."
Mr Chapple said Buru Energy was trying to avoid public concerns about fracking in the Kimberley.
"It doesn't really bode well for actually having positive dialogue with the community when you're skulking around in the backwoods doing stuff which obviously people are concerned about," he said."
Sounds like a company with "strong environmental commitments". Buru were in the news again this year on June 24th with the Sydney Morning Herald reporting that,
"High levels of a radioactive material and other contaminants have been found in water from a West Australian fracking site but operators say it could be diluted and fed to beef cattle...Buru Energy says sampling from its Kimberley fracking operations found "relatively high concentrations" of a radioactive substance.
Buru Energy says sampling from its Kimberley fracking operations found "relatively high concentrations" of a radioactive substance.
The findings were contained in a report by oil and gas company Buru Energy that has not been made public. It shows the company also plans to reinject wastewater underground – a practice that has brought on seismic events when used in the United States... The work was suspended when the WA government last year introduced a fracking moratorium, subject to the findings of a scientific inquiry...In a submission to the inquiry obtained by the Lock the Gate Alliance, Buru Energy said a “relatively high concentration” of Radium-228, a radioactive element, was found in two water samples from a well in 2015 and 2016.
The so-called “flowback water” contains fracking fluids, and water released from rock in which naturally-occurring radioactive materials can be concentrated.
The samples exceeded drinking water guidelines for radionuclides. However Buru Energy said samples collected from retention ponds were below guideline levels and the water posed “no risk to humans or animals”.
Water monitoring also detected elevated levels of the chemical elements barium, boron and chloride.
Buru Energy said while the water was not suitable for human consumption, the “reuse of flowback water for beef cattle may also be considered”.
The water did not meet stockwater guidelines but this could be addressed “through dilution with bore water”.
The company's development in the Yulleroo area of the basin could lead to 80 wells operating over 20 years
Labor environment spokesman Tony Burke said Buru’s operations “are likely to raise significant and possibly prohibited concerns under the water trigger”. He said the law should be used properly, including acting on input from scientific experts.."
Could be a bit of a headache right? All that scrutiny from environmentalists opposed to fracking? Federal Labor's poodle-esque Tony Burke making noises?
Like I said google Buru Energy fracking and see just how much opposition Buru Energy is up against. All the major environmental organisations oppose what Buru Energy is doing in spite of a government inquiry concluding fracking is safe.
Be nice if everbody opposed to you got distracted by another issue perhaps? Maybe manufacture a scare campaign targeted at another industry which has never tried to harm you but is economically small and politically isolated? If you're Eric Streitberg and your partner is a marine biologist called Jessica Meeuwig you can.
Yes, that was not a typo. A 2011 profile on Eric in The Australian newspaper has this quote,
"He stays fit by snorkelling and diving with his partner of three years, marine biologist Jessica Meeuwig, who also keeps an eye on his environmental credentials. "It's an interesting juxtaposition," he says "
Yes. It is a VERY interesting "juxtaposition". Jessica Meeuwig who's constant lies about fishermen are uncritically reported by a media who are usually lightning quick to question the motives of anybody who goes against the prevailing orthodoxy (James Cook Universities Peter Ridd anybody?) is partners (married to Eric my sources tell me) with the head of an oil and gas exploration company and the media NEVER scrutinise this fact. In fact it seems as if its almost deliberately NOT reported on in the media..
Some other interesting questionss in this case are, which high profile WA mining "magnate" has invested in fracking in the Kimberly through one of his subsidiaries, Squadron Energy? Andrew Forest....
Which high profile WA mining "magnate" owns the biggest local newspaper in West Australia and one of its TV channels (Channel 7) and is mates with "Twiggy"? Kerry Stokes.
Remember, Buru Energy defends its fracking operations on the basis of a government inquiry which ran for less than a year declaring it "safe". Presumably Andrew Forest would defend his proposed fracking operations in the same manner yet he funds an attack on the credibility of Western Australia's fisheries managers and fishermen who have a decades longer, and government vouched for, track record of sustainability than the fracking industry? This doesn't add up until you look for Andrew Forests motive in slandering a sustainable industry, the massive profits he stands to make from fracking along with Eric Streitberg and the very handy connections both have available to them to manipulate the public conversation for their own interests along with willing accomplice Jessica Meeuwig. {end quote}
Article source: https://www.facebook.com/APFisherman/posts/1805856719530844
Tim Winton is an idiot - Sea Change: Tim Winton’s view from the deep
https://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=13555&page=0&fbclid=IwAR16i7CuDIGFd8XKdkgRVl8vF7pG4cu4-9tg9Bs_HWKYzxP8e-0qlPStq_Y
Unravelling the Deception of a False Movement - Big oil and save the shark
Unravelling the Deception of a False Movement
In 1948 the family set up the Pew Charitable Trust, based in
Philadelphia, with an endowment totalling nearly $4 billion in the year
2000. [3] …The utility of buying the loyalty of liberals impressed
itself on the family rather late, in the 1980s. But since then they have
more than made up for lost time. By the beginning of the second Clinton
term, the Pew Charitable Trusts represented one of the largest donors
to the environmental movement, with about $250 million a year invested.
[4] …Pew rarely went it alone. It preferred to work in coalitions with
those other foundations, which meant almost no radical opposition to
their cautious environmental policies can get any money. [5]
…But this did not tell the full story of coercion through money. One
of the conditions attached to the receipt of Pew grant money was that
attention be focused on government actions. Corporate wrongdoers were
not to be pursued. With Pew money rolling their way, the environmental
opposition became muted, judicious and finally disappeared.
----------------------------------------
Biggar is an endorser and likely key organizer of, the Tar Sands Action in Ottawa. Adam Shedletzky is founding director and board representative of LeadNow modeled after MoveOn.org (USA) and GetUp.org.au
-------------------------------------------
The largest donors to the NRDC include the Pew Foundation (Sun
Oil/Sunoco), the W. Alton Jones Foundation (Citgo), and the Rockefeller
Brothers Fund (Standard Oil/Exxon Mobil). The Rockefeller family
initiated the Environmental Grantmakers’ Association. The British Royals
(BP) as well as Prince Bernhard (Shell) and the Rockefellers were
principal actors in initiating the World Wildlife Federation (WWF) as
well as the World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWFN). The International
Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) NGO partners with
corporations such as Shell
and boasts “corporate green” members such as NRDC. The IUCN has funding
of approximately $100 million in 2010 with funding from the private
sector increasing considerably. The three largest conservation
organizations worldwide – The Nature Conservancy, WWF, and Conservation International combined revenues exceed $2 billion (2007),
Source https://thewrongkindofgreen.wordpress.com/2011/09/26/unravelling-the-deception-of-a-false-movement/?fbclid=IwAR1YqATkx2AADI7e8VH__3LW97BsEg9HurMkPxOClzByXLSaXIkvd7HTGTU
Sources: “The Decline of Big Green, Part One Shaky Foundations: Toxic Sources, Tainted Money” by Jeffrey St. Clair:
The Real Shark Con, Controlling Our Seas, And Other Stories By H.E. Sawyer
www.hesawyer.com
{"There was something fishy about shark conservation from the start. The closer one looked at the
hyperbolic claims, the murkier the waters became.
A Few Words About The Pew Charitable
Trusts (Remember the group of shark attack victims who were ushered to Washington to lobby Congress for shark protection?)
Founded by the children of Joseph N. Pew, CEO of the Sun Oil Company, (Sunoco), the Pew Charitable Trusts have donated millions to environmental groups. Sunoco is considered an environmental leader in the oil and gas industry.
The Shark Trust is just one of 85 NGOs who receive funding from Pew, as part of the Shark Alliance, which Pew formed. This benefactor expects environmental groups within the Shark Alliance to toe their party line, or lose funding.
The important thing to remember here is that Pew are the biggest hitter in shark conservation, (BabeRuth!) and they’re an American charitable foundation created from an American oil corporation.
The obvious question is: why is an oil company channeling dollars to save sharks?The answer: it was a strategy to improve the oil company’s image. Greenwashing!
Oil corporations reinvented themselves as energy corporations keen to push their environmental credentials. BP, British Petroleum,(remember the Deepwater Horizon debacle and subsequent coastal devastation?) They changed their company logo to the eco-friendly yellow and green sunburst. (How cute!)
Pew were not just the benevolent green face of Sunoco. They founded SeaWeb. One of the first things SeaWeb did was commission a survey to discover which ocean issue would best engage the public.
The results told SeaWeb that 81% of Americans thought oil spills were a very serious problem.(“Overfishing” wasn’t even on the radar). Negative attention was diverted from oil companies to fisheries, (thanks to the eco-shark agenda, funded by PEW.)
The important thing to remember here? Oil companies were to blame in the minds of the public. Until they were told the problem was overfishing."}
The Real Shark Con, Controlling Our Seas, And Other Stories By H.E. Sawyer
www.hesawyer.com
https://www.facebook.com/WA-shark-cull-The-Greens-funded-by-oil-money-630606130338575
Shark Protection: IT’S ALL ABOUT OIL! - The Sharkman of Cortez, Mirror only
The Sharkman of Cortez website appears hacked so we left a copy here for him. You can find the original here: [start quote]
Shark Protection: IT’S ALL ABOUT OIL!
For over a decade I’ve struggled to understand why countless environmental groups wage a massive campaign to brainwash the public into believing sharks need protection. This unprecedented juggernaut of nonsense defies rational understanding. Countless Eco websites, news stories, even public figures seem intent to jump onto a bandwagon of government and non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) which chant an ill-conceived mantra: “One hundred million sharks killed a year—send money—we need to save the sharks.”
They created drama and crisis while filling NGO pockets. Sharks are a perfect poster child for an agenda that claims overfishing will destroy the planet, yet countless seafood markets once offering fresh local seafood fail as an unprecedented 90% of our seafood is now imported. American jobs lost as this well-funded “over-fishing” campaign fueled with bad science and no evidence of so-called declining fish stocks crushes us. For thirty years I have asked the question: Why??
Greed, power and money feed the deadliest species of sharks: land sharks—the ones with two legs.
On September 19th I received an article written by a reporter from the United Kingdom titled: The Real Shark Con, Controlling our Seas and Other Stories.
This article by Howard Sawyer was based on a two year investigation about shark protection. I believe it is the biggest news since the Watergate break-in and resignation of a US president.
His article is about corruption and greed in one of the largest industries and ‘charitable’ foundations in America. Many people believe it could ultimately destroy our planet. In today’s climate of concern over ocean destruction and vulnerable eco-systems, I believe the power of the public perception should know the real story. And it ain’t about ocean sharks!
For the purpose of space I have condensed Mr. Sawyers’ investigation, adding comments in
His entire story can be found at: www.hesawyer.com
The Real Shark Con, Controlling Our Seas, And Other Stories
By H.E. Sawyer
There was something fishy about shark conservation from the start. The closer one looked at the
hyperbolic claims, the murkier the waters became.
A Few Words About The Pew Charitable
Trusts (Remember the group of shark attack victims who were ushered to Washington to lobby Congress for shark protection?)
Founded by the children of Joseph N. Pew, CEO of the Sun Oil Company, (Sunoco), the Pew Charitable Trusts have donated millions to environmental groups. Sunoco is considered an environmental leader in the oil and gas industry.
The Shark Trust is just one of 85 NGOs who receive funding from Pew, as part of the Shark Alliance, which Pew formed. This benefactor expects environmental groups within the Shark Alliance to toe their party line, or lose funding.
The important thing to remember here is that Pew are the biggest hitter in shark conservation, (Babe Ruth!) and they’re an American charitable foundation created from an American oil corporation.
The obvious question is: why is an oil company channeling dollars to save sharks?The answer: it was a strategy to improve the oil company’s image. Greenwashing!
Oil corporations reinvented themselves as energy corporations keen to push their environmental credentials. BP, British Petroleum,(remember the Deepwater Horizon debacle and subsequent coastal devastation?) They changed their company logo to the eco-friendly yellow and green sunburst. (How cute!)
Pew were not just the benevolent green face of Sunoco. They founded SeaWeb. One of the first things SeaWeb did was commission a survey to discover which ocean issue would best engage the public.
The results told SeaWeb that 81% of Americans thought oil spills were a very serious problem.
(“Overfishing” wasn’t even on the radar). Negative attention was diverted from oil companies to fisheries, (thanks to the eco-shark agenda, funded by PEW.)
The important thing to remember here? Oil companies were to blame in the minds of the public. Until they were told the problem was overfishing.
Rebranding The Shark
No longer a ‘mindless killer’ it was portrayed as a victim. Conservation gave sharks an enemy with a face. Better still, a foreign face. The Asian market for shark fin soup. It was David vs. Goliath. Sharks were being killed for soup. The shark was now charismatic, faced a crisis, and had a villain. A perfect package for fund raising. The important thing to remember here is that the shark conservation package was developed and marketed by Pew. For misdirection. They produced a 32 page glossy report entitled ‘Sharks in Trouble.’ The report included the dramatic decline in shark populations, (non-verifiable) complete with emotive photography of finned sharks lifeless on the seabed, pushing the ‘shark con’ agenda with leaps of faith and cherry picked, slanted science.
Essentially it was propaganda. Their solution: add more fishing regulations and trade restrictions. And most important: add shark sanctuaries. (Fact is: sharks are migratory and not likely to stay put.)
Points I raised to Pew about their report were simply unaddressed and ignored. Pew’s Director of Global Shark Conservation cared less about ‘Sharks in Trouble’ than I did. Are sharks simply Pew’s poster child? Remember the ‘The Shawshank Redemption,’ there’s another story going on, behind the poster, out of sight.
The Shark Con
After eighteen months of researching shark conservation, Pew’s involvement made no sense. Why was the shark so important? I realised I was neglecting the bigger picture.
‘The Shark Con’ a film by American Rusty Armstrong in 2010 had a tag line ‘It’s only business’. He found the embedded conservation message at every turn. Then he met a retired shark fisherman who had a completely different tale to tell. (Me: The Sharkman of Cortez.) “Sharks weren’t overfished, people were being paid to say this.”
Then came insight from Russell Hudson of Directed Fisheries. He spoke about Pew, “They had their people everywhere.” And he told Rusty why Pew were so interested in sharks. He
suggested that because the shark interacted in every fishery on the planet, it gave Pew leverage in every aspect of commercial fishing. (Follow the money…)
Pew’s SeaWeb painted overfishing as bad guy as far as the health of our oceans and Pew were the good guys, funding conservation. That’s how I knew shark conservation were distorting the facts.
The Real Shark Con
Why was the charitable foundation of an oil corporation funding shark conservation? Pew had funded SeaWeb and in turn changed negative public perception from oil companies to fisheries. (Now here’s the REAL story)
Pew Charitable Trusts called for a National Ocean Policy for the US outer continental shelf. The policy they wrote became law. Top of the list was zoning large areas of sea floor for the purpose of leasing them to corporations for energy production (Offshore DRILLING!)
It’s a very clever way of rapidly privatising the ocean and effectively becoming the sea’s landlord!
Shark conservation, as funded by Pew, appears to be greenwash buffering an oil corporation looking to
increase their real estate portfolio. It’s a land grab that can be leased, regulated and exploited, if, when, and as they wish, for the benefit of their stock holders. (And they’re fucking all those animal activists and eco-lunatics who promote their cause! God knows I’m rolling on the floor laughing as I read this!)
If you look at Pew’s stock holdings, they’re not fisheries, they’re energy corporations. An oil corporation ‘greenwashing’ its image through a charitable trust that ‘guides’
conservationists towards an agenda that suits and rewards itself for its philanthropy. I know how much profit these companies make, and how much political influence they wield.
Pew were instrumental in getting George W. Bush to declare the Marianas Trench a National Monument in 2009. It gives NOAA, (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), “primary responsibility for managing fishery-related activities”. Naturally Pew have their people inside NOAA, so the fox is presumably guarding the hen house. (Now we all know the Bush White House wasn’t eco-friendly but his involvement in Big Oil is legendary! It was one of his last executive orders he signed before leaving
office.)
The ocean is being divvied up behind our backs. Public resources falling into ‘private’ hands, with a marine protection area here, and a shark sanctuary there. (Maybe oil exploration and an oil platform too). Google ‘Palau EEZ’ and the first hit is www.seaaroundus.org. You’ll see the Pew Charitable Trust logo top right of the screen. And the Palau Shark Sanctuary is one of those 85 NGOs in the Shark Alliance under Pew’s umbrella.
Then there’s the Chagos Marine Protected Area. I emailed the Chagos Conservation Trust to ask if there’d been a survey of the MPA seabed. Secretary Simon E. Hughes replied;
“I am pretty sure that no such surveys or anything like it has been carried out ever. Access is strictly controlled.” (Now why would a survey be needed to protect sharks?) His closing comment was, “May I enquire what your interest is?”
Needless to say within 48 hours I had a survey of the Chagos MPA seabed from the National Oceanographic Centre in Southampton. (Oh what a tangled web we weave when we try to deceive. Might this investigative reporter Howard Sawyer been uncovering things best kept from the public.)
The oceans are being carved up, and we either don’t know, or don’t care, that someone is taking advantage of our ignorance or naivety. All of this appears to be done under the veiled assumption that it’s all about ‘saving the shark’ from the Chinese.(Oh, really?) It’s estimated that 25% of the planet’s oil and gas resources are under the sea bed. Someone is going to extract it sooner or later. The question is; who in shark conservation knew what the underlying agenda was?
Going back through The Shark Trust accounts, “mapping activities” have been carried out for Pew Shark Alliance since 2008.
Conservationists are so passionate about saving sharks that the funding and resources Pew brought to the table were simply irresistible.
www.hesawyer.com
Sharkman of Cortez here:
I attended a protest aimed at the National Marine fisheries in St. Petersburg a few months back and many signs in the crowd read, PEW—Something stinks. At the time, I thought this was nothing more than a play on words. That all the eco-propaganda was funded by
animal kooks and PETA freaks.
Thanks to a real investigative reporter intent on getting the truth I now get the entire
picture. It’s really about greed, power and of course Green Money. Those conservation
hypocrites will do their spin, they’ll probably claim the above story is
bullshit. But the computer is a wonderful tool. Google search for yourself; the
facts are public record. No self-respecting fisherman, commercial or otherwise would
EVER support offshore “energy exploration” (drilling). The cost is too devastating.
An ocean with less sharks—no problem. But an ocean covered with OIL?? Remember
what I said about those two-legged land sharks – oil company CEO’s and the ones
from the Save the Shark NGO’s – they’ll eat each other in a mass feeding-frenzy
while they fornicate the public. Hell, they‘ve got the whole country
brainwashed. We’ll all lose!
Remember the Exxon Valdez disaster in Alaska, or howabout what BP has done to our Gulf Coast. Those eco-systems will never be the same. And everyone is worried about a few sharks?
IT’S ALL ABOUT OIL!
Shark Protection: IT’S ALL ABOUT OIL! | Sharkman of Cortez
sharkmanofcortez.com
For over a decade I’ve struggled to understand why countless environmental groups wage a massive campaign to brainwash the public into believing sharks need protection. This unprecedented juggernaut of nonsense defies rational understanding. Countless Eco websites, news stories, even public figure... [end quote]
https://www.facebook.com/SharkmanOfCortez
www.hesawyer.com
Sunday, 21 April 2013
Grey Nurse Shark Attacks Australian Man in Shallow Waters
A fisherman was attacked by a shark and suffered deep puncture wounds on both legs while fishing in shallow waters off the coast of New South Wales, Australia.
His brother, Ray said he was attacked while releasing one of three sharks caught in a fishing net.
"Alan was involved in removing one of the sharks out of the wings of the net.
"He released that shark but another shark came in and bit him on both legs."
Emergency services including surf life savers were quickly on the scene. The 51-year-old was flown by the Westpac Rescue Helicopter to hospital for treatment to puncture wounds and lacerations to his legs.
The three-metre long shark was described as a Grey Nurse, common off the east coast between central Queensland and southern NSW.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/459637/20130421/shark-attack-australia-new-south-wales-grey.htm
Beach closed: Onlookers watch as tiger sharks hang around at Trigg
Beach closed: Onlookers watch as tiger sharks hang around at Trigg Australia
- PerthNow
- December 19, 2012
The sharks ranged in size from 1m to 3m, with several large sharks among the school.
The sharks were spotted from the air about 6.30am today, after beachgoers had reported a large dolphin in distress in shallow water.
Several people went to alert authorities about the dolphin but when they returned the mammal had disappeared.
According to Surf Life Saving WA the sharks were seen from the Westpac Lifesaver Helicopter just 20m off Trigg Beach.
Community Safety manager with Surf Lifesaving WA, Chris Peck, said he believed the sharks had probably taken the dolphin and would move on after they had devoured it.
Mr Peck said the sharks were between Trigg and Scarborough Beach at an area known locally as Contacio.
He said there were several 3m sharks in the school.
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/school-of-tiger-sharks-close-trigg-beach/story-e6frg12c-1226540310777
Thursday, 5 April 2012
Great white filmed circling 300 metres off Kalbarri
The shark has reportedly been spotted circling crayfish boats from the town 600km north of Perth.
Wayne Dewar, from Kalbarri Volunteer Marine Rescue managed to record footage of the great white last Friday about 300m off shore.
Nine News played the footage to WA shark expert Hugh Edwards who confirmed it was almost certainly a great white.
"It's doing all the things that great whites do, completely without fear alongside the boat," he said.
Some Kalbarri community members are calling for the great white to be killed over safety fears for people out on boats and surfers in the popular holiday spot.
But Mr Dewar said his group was not calling for the shark to be killed.
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/great-white-filmed-circling-fishing-boats-off-kalbarri/story-e6frg14u-1226319054974
Tuesday, 3 April 2012
Great White chases Kayak off Cottesloe WA
Kayak Fisherman vs Great White Shark
* For any questions & comments, go to yakass.net
This version contains some footage not seen in the original. Enjoy :-)
National school triathlon cancels ocean swim after death shark spotted
National school triathlon cancels ocean swim
And, a shark was spotted close to Busselton jetty yesterday forcing the closure of some beaches.
Almost 800 students were set to swim around the jetty tomorrow.
School Sports WA's Peter Smith says the attack, as well as the shark sighting, made the decision easier.
"Obviously the decision to put the kids in the water would have been a big one and the groups involved, none were prepared to do that," he said.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-03/school-triathlon-cancels-ocean-swim/3929154?section=wa
Surfer eaten by a shark at a beach near Gracetown
Surfer dies after shark attack
Local residents have told how they tried to resuscitate the man who had suffered horrific injuries.
Eddie Kilgallon was among a group of local residents who went to the man's aid and tried to revive him.
"We just kept on encouraging him," he said.
"We noticed that he had a wedding ring on, constantly reminding him of the people that do love him and we tried to give him their love."
Mr Kilgallon says the man's injuries were horrific.
"[The] back half of his leg was totally chomped. It looked like one bite. It looked like a big shark bite," he said.
It is understood the man was a father and worked in Western Australia's Goldfields.
Rob Alder says he was watching the surfer from his house and had been deciding whether to go for a surf himself when he saw the man lose his board and not come back up again.
Mr Alder says he rushed down to the beach with his friends and alerted a rescue crew.
He says they found the surfer washed up on rocks near South Point, lying unconscious with a huge gash to his leg.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-08-17/surfer-dies-after-shark-attack/947604
How a Great White Pointer ate a man in waist deep water Cottesloe WA
The Science of Shark Attacks
On the other side of the world on the west coast of Australia, a group of swimmers confrontation with a Great White revealed how selective a shark can be when choosing its prey. In Perth there is a local swimming group called the Pod. One of their members was businessman Ken Crew. The morning of November 6th 2000 started like any other. The 'pod' met on the beach for their usual 6.30am swim. At the end of the swim over a dozen of the members stood chest deep water. Then suddenly someone yelled 'Shark! Get out of the water!' The swimmers fled for their lives. The Great White caught Ken in its massive jaws. The shark had bitten off his right leg, slicing through a major artery. He'd bled to death in seconds. But how and why did the shark single out Ken Crew, in the middle of such a large group of swimmers?
http://www.firstscience.com/home/articles/nature/the-science-of-shark-attacks-page-2-1_1375.html
Shark tears surfer to pieces at Margs near Busselton WA
Surfer killed in shark attack off Western Australia
Nicholas eventually died on the way to hospital this morning.
Local surfer Eddie Kilgallon, 42, was about 200m away from the attack at South Point in Cowaramup Bay, Western Australia when he heard shouting and a man yelling "Shark! Shark!"
"There were about four of us in the water and we all freaked out," he said.
"I thought it was a shark at first and thought 'This is it, I'm gone too'."
Nicholas, who is a miner from Busselton, south of Perth, was dragged out of the ocean onto the beach.
Eddie added: "We wrapped a jumper around his legs and used a leg rope as a tourniquet.
"I was holding what was left of his leg together. The bottom half of his thigh was exposed and ripped open. Half of his calf muscle was also torn to shreds.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3099481/Surfer-killed-in-shark-attack.html
Champion surfer eaten in brutal shark attack SW Australia
Champion surfer killed in brutal shark attack
Schiller, who was a European team body boarding champion in 1995, was one of a large group surfing in the area when the attack happened.
Fellow surfers searched for the Frenchman's body but police later said it had been carried away by the waves.
"There were around 20 people in shallow water and about five surfers out deeper when it happened," a witness told a local news agency.
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/21092011/58/champion-surfer-killed-brutal-shark-attack.html
White Pointer eats swimmer at Cottesloe beach WA
Shark kills bather yards from family beach
By Barbie Dutter in Sydney| Attacked: Kenneth Crew had his leg bitten off in waist-deep water |
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/1373613/Shark-kills-bather-yards-from-family-beach.html