Eco Chamber # 8: Michaelle Jean's Misleading Seal Feast

By now, you’ve probably heard about the Queen’s representative eating the raw heart of a dead seal this week. But there is more going on here than just heating up the old debate over the Canadian seal hunt — the news event continued a tradition of misleading the Canadian public about this issue.

General Michaëlle Jean’s legitimized the Canadian seal hunt this week by participating in gutting and eating the artery of a seal with Inuit groups while on a visit to Rankin Inlet, Nunavut. Jean claims this culinary experience showcased in front of national media was to assert Inuits’ rights to their cultural heritage. But is this really about fostering our multiculturalism?

“It’s like Sushi,” Jean said at the time.

But unlike eating a piece of raw fish at your local Japanese restaurant, there is more at stake here than a cultural experience. In a month when the European Union has banned Canadian commercial seal hunt products, it seems like more than coincidental timing for Jean’s “good-will” gesture. If anything, this act was a political maneuver, legitimizing the Canadian seal hunt on the grounds of cultural autonomy for suffering Inuit groups.

However, there is significant blurring of the lines between two starkly different industries: the commercial seal hunt in the east coast of Canada and traditional Inuit hunts in the far north.
The east-coast hunt consists of targeting 300,000 baby Harp seals in Newfoundland and the St. Lawrence Gulf annually for seal products like furs, pelts and extracts for Omega-3 pills. It is a commercial industry that hires 6,000 off-season fishermen and earns $5.5 million. In contrast, the Inuit hunt that has been practiced for over 4,000 years kills 10,000 Ring seals (a mere 3 percent of the industrial seal hunt) in the Northern territories. It is mainly practiced for food and the local economy.

“There is a difference in an indigenous culture’s right to hunt for food and economic survival, and the non-indigenous Newfoundlander’s massive slaughter of defenceless animals for profit and vanity,” says Patrick Doyle, CEO of NativeRadio.com.

Furthermore, the Inuit have been exempt from the EU ban while the east-coast hunt hasn’t. However, Inuit were exempt in the ban by European countries in the 1980s, yet they were still negatively affected. Which is something surely to be taken into consideration, more so by Canada than Europe. Nevertheless, there are important distinctions to be made in the Canadian seal hunt.

Almost no animals-rights groups are condemning the Inuit hunt — they focus their campaigns on the east-coast commercial hunt. And to suggest otherwise, as Jean has in defending the Inuit seal hunt as if these things are equivalent, masks these important distinctions.

But few feel anyways GG’s political feast will have any affect in swaying European opinion in changing its pace to Canada’s banning.

“The fact that the Governor General in public is slashing and eating a seal, I don’t think really helps the cause and I’m convinced this will not change the minds of European citizens and politicians,” Barbara Slee, an activist with the International Fund for Animal Welfare, told the Toronto Star.

But what this gesture does do is continue a kind of blackout for Canadians. It dupes the public about one of Canada’s great shames in the international sphere (next to the Alberta tar sands). It mixes up one of the largest mass slaughters of mammals with a culturally unique and comparatively small traditional hunt. They’re not the same.

Yet this story is the same old story; Japan too claims to be defending its “culture” with its annual Southern Ocean whale hunt of nearly a thousand whales, including endangered ones.

Governments cannot hide behind culture in the face of their own eco-injustice.

Eco Chamber # 7: The Question of Energy

It is my birthday this week. As I turn 25, there is one question I face: do I have a future? My life from here on out, and the lives of my generation, will be shaped by the choices we make now. The choices we make depend on one word: energy.

We are at a precipice. We either make a paradigm shift in the 21st century with our energy consumption. Or we stand to repeat the 20th century with “fossil fool” reliance and be doomed. Essentially, I either have a future or I don’t.

Energy sourcing will be the most important issue in the next 10 to 20 years and will shape the remainder of this century, as well as beyond. Presently, 86 percent of the world’s energy comes from fossil fuels — oil, coal and gas. These energy sources ave shaped our way of life in the 20th century, providing us with our technological advances and many creature comforts along the way. But running cars, heating up our bathtubs and blaring TV sets come with a price tag of more than just money.

The price could be the my generation’s future. Fossil fuels are destroying landscapes with strip mining (such as what’s happening in the Appalachian Mountains for coal), polluting air and water, and is the number one contributor to anthropogenic climate change.

Yet there are reasons for hope as U.S. President Barack Obama has shown great strides in changing energy practices. The president plans to make sustainability “the centerpiece of a new American economy.” He aims to implement a “Green New Deal” that would double solar, wind and biomass energy sources and cut U.S. dependency on oil with fuel-efficient auto standards. These transformations can create jobs and make for a more energy-secure superpower.

However, developing countries like China, India, and parts of the Middle East will still account for 80 percent of future oil demands. Therefore, “fossil fuels will continue to meet 80 per cent of global energy needs for the foreseeable future,” Thomas Axworthy recently wrote in the Toronto Star.

And if there is no global plan to reduce emissions, scientists are now stating there is a 90 percent probability that temperatures will rise between 3.5° to 7.4°C on the earth’s surface. This will have a horrendous impact on all life on the planet.

Hence, there needs to be a global energy shift. Some argue that this shift comes in the form of nuclear. Jeremy Nelson makes this argument in the current cover story of This: that to battle climate change, he says, it’s not renewables we need to turn to, but an older generation of power, nuclear. He argues that solar and wind energy is unreliable because they fluctuate, and still lag in development, while nuclear energy is zero-emissions now.

Despite grudgingly agreeing with Nelson that to be a pro-environmentalist today might mean being pro-nuclear, there is still a mighty can of worms being opened with nuclear power generation.

Nuclear might in fact be used to accelerate Canada’s desire to become the next fossil-fuel superpower: It will be used for the energy needs of the Alberta tar sands, says Andrew Nikiforuk in his book Tar Sands: Dirty Oil and the Future of a Continent. Nuclear would assist in the production of the unconventional oil that already emits three times

more greenhouse gases than a conventional barrel of oil does.

So ironically, increasing nuclear power in Canada may actually increase fossil fuel emissions, rather than lowering them. There are some benefits to shifting now to a low-emission nuclear — but nuclear is not the be-all-and-end-all for energy. At best, it might be a temporary solution for action today, this year, even perhaps for the next 10-20 years on climate change. But for the remainder of the century, other means of energy need to be considered.

We, as humans, think we know it all. But perhaps we don’t know what the energy of the 21st century will be yet. Perhaps it is in research and development that we could find it. The Obama administration has recently given stimulus to R&D with 3 percent of the nation’s GDP — that is US$46 billion annually — put into prospects for the future.

Is my sense of urgency premature? I am, after all, only 25. But this is the year, a make-it or break-it year, with the Copenhagen Climate Conference. A year that is our next, and probably final, chance for a climate agreement to make fossil fuels history. We either have a future or we don’t: the answer depends on shifting energy — and shifting now.

Eco Chamber #6: The Activism of Bikes

Not many see bikes as a symbol for activism. However, that is just what the Toronto Cyclists’ Union is changing. They advocate for a more bike-friendly city to encourage environmental, social and urban sustainability.

“Think of us as the Canadian Automobile Association of bikes. Like CAA, 80% of our work is advocacy. However, instead of advocacy for the automobile, we advocate for bikes,” says Yvonne Bambrick, Executive Director of the Toronto Cyclists Union (TCU).

Two wheels are on the rise throughout North America. Portland, Oregon , for instsance, recently outpaced Copenhagen in the #2 spot for “best bike cities.” Toronto is seeing a rapid influx of cyclists in its urban spaces. According to Treehugger, the latest census report shows that from 2001 to 2006, cyclists have increased by 32 percent, while the automobile commuters have decreased by 5.2 percent.

The TCU was formed out of a desire to replicate bike advocacy groups found elsewhere in North America. With such a rise of cyclists in Toronto, it is time to build more bike lanes and for cyclists’ voices to be heard in a city where cars have mostly dominated, says Bambrick. In 2008, the group’s launch year, there were 70 members of the Union. Within a year, that number has grown to nearly 600.

“The bike is a powerful tool. It’s a no-emissions means of transportation; a way of battling climate change, smog and city pollution; low-cost for individuals; relieves the overburden city congestion; and promotes better health,” says Bambrick.

But bike advocacy faces challenges: there are city councilors who consistently prioritize parking and traffic issues, instead of issues relevant to cyclists. Some of the city’s infrastructure plans consider pedestrians and greenery over bikes. And then there’s the generalized North American mentality that the automobile rules — and anything else is road-kill.

But the TCU is maneuvering around these barriers this year. Boosted by its members’ dues, the TCU is an aggressive lobbyist at the municipal, provincial and federal level. Last week, speaking at a Toronto city infrastructure meeting, the TCU advocated building new bike lanes as part of a redevelopment plan for Jarvis Street, a five-lane road that currently acts as an artery for auto traffic. An amendment was approved and new bike lanes should be included when the plan passes council.

Beyond transforming roads, TCU is attempting to transform minds. From road rage against cyclists — road rage so toxic that a 36-year-old man lost a leg in a confrontation with a taxi last year — The TCU wants to restore some respect for cyclists’ rights, and their media efforts are helping to do that.

One shouldn’t have to be ‘Brave-Heart’ to cycle to work every day, threatened by cars and minimal lane space, says Bambrick. Instead, the TCU wants to make cycling an activity that every urbanite can do in safety.

As one of our oldest forms of transportation, bikes are also our future. It is a symbol of sustainability and shifting attitudes. In these times, bike advocacy groups are more necessary than ever. They put this back-to-the future two-wheeler in its rightful place in our cities — everywhere.

Eco Chamber #5: The Green Scare

An activist in Goteborg, Sweden was attacked this week for his efforts at crippling the fur industry in Sweden. Some of the furs he targeted in his actions were seal furs from Canada. Branded an “eco-terrorist,” his opponents say he is threatening jobs and the economy. But when the “eco-terrorists” are the ones actually being terrorized, who are the real terrorists here?

Alfred Törre, an animal rights activist in his mid-20’s, had a fire bomb smash through his apartment window. Törre was inside his apartment at the time as his window curtains went up in flames; luckily he was able to extinguish the fire before it spread further. But the police believe that the perpetrator is connected with the Swedish fur industry and the crime has been reported as attempted arson. Törre, who could have been sleeping during the arson attack, fears for his life.

Attacks on “eco-terrorists” are not rare. Some attacks have taken the form of imprisonment by governments; others have been physical intimidation or harm by self-styled vigilantes. In the post 9-11 era, radical environmental activists, such as animal rights activists, have been transformed into ‘eco-terrorists’ in the public eye.

In 2005, the FBI “rated eco-terrorists” as the “top domestic terrorism threat. The media inflamed this threat, with reports appearing in ABC News, BBC News and the Globe & Mail. They all talked about the threat of “eco-terrorism” and gave little voice to the side of the alleged perpetrators—the activists, instead demonizing them.

According to the blog Green is the New Red, a “green scare” has been promoted through ad campaigns in newspapers such as a New York Times and public relations campaigns that have turned innocuous literature like Charlotte’s Web into manifestos of eco-extremism.

But the ones facing the real threats are not society at large or civilians, but the activists themselves. Activists face surveillance and infiltration for their environmental efforts which is damaging our civil liberties. Törre himself had his apartment watched for months, then raided by federal police in 2007, for a perceived link to radical animal rights groups. Following the raid, he spent several months in jail without being informed of the charges against him.

Other activists have been physically beaten and their lives endangered by the goons of industry. In 2003, Allison Watson, a Sea Shepherd activist who was protesting the Taiji dolphin hunt, was brutally attacked by some local fishermen. She was run over by a fisherman’s boat while in the water, and another fisherman attempted to strangle the activist with rope.

This kind of green-fear-mongering is not to make us safer, but to promote a corporate agenda, a corporate agenda that the “eco-terrorists” threaten when they protest against dolphin, whale, seal, and fur commodization, among other things. But this message gets slanted to protecting jobs and the economy and much of the public buys into this argument.

Take for example the Canadian seal hunt, before this recent EU ban on seal products, the seal industry brought in $5.5 million to our GDP and 6,000 jobs. Eco-actions against the 300,000 baby seals clubbed every year were deemed as “eco-terrorism” that threatened jobs and the local economy.

But what are the costs to demonizing eco-activists? Beyond the obvious environmental degradation that gets subverted, our rights and democracy are at risk.

Standing up against injustice, being an engaged citizen, and voicing opposition promotes a healthy functioning democracy. Freedom of speech is our basic civil liberty. Threatening these cripples our society.

The attack on Törre is not a simple arson investigation, but part of a larger societal problem. The problem being that the real eco-terrorists, corporations and conservative governments that aid them, are scaring us into inaction, or bullying those who do act, for the sake of private profit.

Eco chamber #4: Eco-Warrior Profile - Alex Morton

Every month, Eco-Chamber profiles an eco-activist from Canada and abroad, called "Eco-Warriors." Eco-Warriors takes a look at both the activist and the environmental issue they fight for, using such approaches as direct action, legal crusading, documentary filmmaking, or green commerce.

As a lover of whales, Alex Morton left eastern plains of Connecticut for the mountainous rainforest of British Columbia. Setting out to study Orca whales, her research soon became more like of a "study of absence," with the whales becoming increasingly rare. She knew the food source of the Orcas was what really needed needed protection: B.C.'s wild salmon. Since there were few people advocating for wild salmon, she became an activist and a scientist.

Short film by Twyla Roscovich

Since 1984, she has written more than 10,000 pages of letters to politicians, written several books, has been profiled in the New York Times, founded a conservation group (adopt-a-fry.org), spoke to the Queen of England in person and led a recent Supreme Court case — yet the fight to protect B.C.'s wild salmon continues.

The problem is fish farms, specifically salmon fisheries. Many people see fish farming as a solution to our 2050 crisis, in which it's predicted the world's wild fish stocks will be depleted because of rising demand and poor management. According to Morton, however, fish farms are more harm than help. Many wild fish are used as pellet food for farmed fish, killing off wild fish populations in the process. Fish farms operated offshore also have the side-effect of infecting wild fish with diseases and parasites.

In British Columbia for example, many Norwegian companies, such as Marine Harvest, operate salmon aquaculture offshore in the south coastal channels, including the Fraser River. Sea lice flourish in these feedlots and attach themselves to baby wild salmon (called "fry") that migrate through the channels. The fry are highly vulnerable and susceptible to infection as they have undeveloped scales. And while parasites, such as sea lice, are a natural occurrence for salmon, the high level of parasite infection coming from fish farms is unnatural. The infection rates are disrupting growth and propagation of the wild salmon and killing off the last of their population.

According to Science magazine, wild pink salmon are likely to become extinct due to offshore fish farming. But the problem does not end with the fry; the fish farms affect the larger B.C. ecosystem, too. Wild salmon are food for such animals as grizzly bears, eagles and Orca whales. Many local communities in B.C. depend upon the wild salmon fishery too. Starting in 2001, Alex Morton watched her community fall apart with the depletion of wild salmon in Echo Bay.

"In Echo Bay, there was once a large community, a school for children and mail delivered three times a week," she says. "Today, there are less then ten people in the community, the school is shut down and there is no mail delivered."

Because there has been no political will to protect wild salmon, and in turn the ecosystem and economy, Morton, in her 50's, decided to take her own direct action. In 2008, Morton founded the Adopt-A-Fry organization, originally with the aim to single-handedly evacuate the wild fry away from the farm-infected areas with her small boat. Since then, last February, her group has gone to the B.C. Supreme Court in a case against one of the largest Norwegian fish farm companies, Marine Harvest, in an attempt to get them off water and on land. Currently, Adopt-A-Fry is collecting signatures on a petition to end offshore fish farming in Canada.

"Farming salmon in Canadian waters is unconstitutional because no one is allowed to privatize ocean spaces, nor schools of fish," says Morton. "Canadian law needs to apply to these Norwegian fisheries."

So far, Morton's petition has gone largely ignored in political circles: B.C. premier, Gordon Campbell and federal Fisheries Minister Gail Shea have both remained silent on the issue. Despite this, the petition has rapidly grown, from 100 signatories in winter 2008 to over 13,000 today. Morton believes that when the petition closes in nearer to a million signatures, the politicians will be forced to listen.

"Somewhere between 13,000 and one million, we will get Canada to follow its own laws," says Morton.

Please visit the group's website to sign the Adopt-A-Fry petition.

Eco Chamber #3 - Earth Day Special: A movement, not a day

April 22nd, 2009 (Earth Day)

One day. That's all. That's all the time dedicated to the environment by 174 nations. That's all the time some one billion people globally will participate in environmental action. That's all, out 365 days a year, and two generations elapsed, since the modern environmental movement began. Earth Day — that is all.

Today's Earth Day is the 39th Earth Day since its inception on April 22, 1970, by U.S. Senator Gaylord Nelson. Earth Day began with the aim of raising awareness of the environment. Today, the Earth Day Network encourages year round participation in the environment. But, typically, people join together on this one day, April 22nd, to do their part by attending an Earth Day festival, planting a tree, or going to a teach-in. But at a time when the entire Arctic ice sheet could be history as early as 2013, is this really enough?

Beyond Earth Day, there is the exploding WWF campaign of Earth Hour, that saw participation of nearly one-sixth the earth's population in 2009 (compared to just a hundred million the previous year). There are many cities that extend Earth Day into Earth Week activities. Planet Green is calling for an Earth Month, where "taking the next step" includes environmental volunteerism and "greening your life." Some, like Greenpeace Canada, call for a green year by making every day Earth Day, and counsels such things as going vegetarian and cutting back on plastic bottles.

But we need more than an Earth Hour, an Earth Day, an Earth Week, an Earth Month or even an Earth Year. Simply flicking off lights for an hour, planting a tree one day of the year, attending "green" events, volunteering occasionally, or recycling and using fewer plastic bags is not enough. We need more than that. We need an Earth Movement.

An Earth Movement is a social uprising — a mobilization of people with a singular goal: the sustainability of our planet and our lives within it.

Now is the time more than ever for an Earth Movement, as we face things like:

• Ocean fish stocks gone by 2050 amid rising demand.
• Destruction of the Amazon rainforest from logging and industrial agriculture. (The Amazon rainforest is not only a huge carbon sink, but also a home to 22 million people and one third of all species in the world.)
• The waste that's stampeding us off a cliff. Ontario alone, despite the pride in its recycling program, produces 12.4 million tonnes of garbage annually while only 3 million tonnes is diverted into recycled goods.
• And let's not forget global climate change. Scientific international consensus states that it is 'virtually certain' there will be a 2°C temperature rise this century — some even argue that a 4-5°C rise is inevitable. Which melts the Greenland and west Antarctic ice sheets, displacing 130 million people as the sea level rises.

However, there is reason to be optimistic about the Earth Movement. The Environmental Protection Agency in the U.S. declared on Friday that CO₂ and five other greenhouses gases are indeed a threat to human health and welfare. Backed by President Obama under the Clean Air Act, this is paving the path to stricter regulations on automobiles, coal fired power plants, and other major emitters.

This sign for optimism has been brought about by a critical mass of activism, public advocacy, and engaged citizenry that has been on the rise for some time. Today there are over 12,000 environmental groups in the U.S., and roughly an equivalent number in Canada. This is the movement that is igniting climate action in Washington and paving a way forward on environmental issues.

The Earth Movement is very much alive — but everyone needs to be engaged in it. Small actions, by people who consider themselves 'green' because they volunteer for environmental causes, bike to work, and hand out the occasional leaflet, are not enough. It's mostly self-serving it doesn't lead to the massive changes that are needed. Though these micro individual changes are good, the macro scale is where the most change needs to happen.

"We're not going to solve this one light bulb at a time, but we just might if we can build one light-filled, light-hearted, lightning-fast movement.," says Bill McKibben, co-founder and director of 350.org, a group that is organizing a global demonstration on October 24, 2009 in Copenhagen.

Therefore, a movement is what we need — not baby-steps by a few. I needs to remain united and inclusive, unlike the movement of the '70s that has since fractured and dissipated. It may seem like I'm asking for a lot here. I am.

But this can happen. Change has happened in the past and it will happen again. It happened because of people, not institutions and politicians. It was people after all who fought the Women's Suffrage movement; people who fought for the Civil Rights Movement. It has, and always has been, citizens who have changed the world.

But we need action and active citizens now if the Earth Movement — and we ourselves — are to survive. It can't be just rhetoric, conversation over the water-coolers or idle thoughts. It can't be just individualistic changes. And it can't be just one day.

Being an activist does not necessary mean standing on the frontlines all tht time. Activism can mean many things, not holding up signs and yelling. Some things we need to do now are promote a green economy by training ourselves and others with the right skills. Over the next few decades, there will be an explosion of green jobs in fields like retrofitting buildings, constructing wind, solar and wave farms, manufacturing parts for those energy farms, urban agriculture and healthy farming, modern efficient urban planning, and public transit.

Activism can also be bringing an environmental angle to other aspects of your life: advocating for green politics in all parties; environmental journalism and writing; speaking out for green causes; documentary filmmaking on eco-issues; art-activism; green education; guerilla gardening; eco-feminism; promotion of green health; connecting ecological causes with social causes such as aboriginal rights; promoting green science and technological development, and so on.

You can be a part of this movement in many ways. But we have to do more than one day's work, and build a worldwide — dare I say — revolution.

Eco Chamber #2: Countdown to Copenhagen

April 17th, 2009

The countdown to Copenhagen is 233 today. That is the number of days left until the Obama administration must sway its own domestic politics by getting Congress on side of climate action, and prove real leadership in global emission reductions. It's a very short timeframe, especially when, in a state of economic turmoil, one big "E" seems to take precedent over another, economics over ecology.

Come December, 170 countries will come together at the Copenhagen Climate Convention in Denmark to attempt at an agreement on reducing greenhouse gases. The Copenhagen agreement will replace the Kyoto Protocol. But like Kyoto, if there is not real leadership from the U.S., the Copenhagen agreement will fail too.

More than leadership, Copenhagen comes down to American politics. Republican and Democratic senators alike are more interested in economics than ecology today, and that attitude will further stall any significant action on climate change. Many scientists say we no longer have any time to wait.

"I frankly think that this Copenhagen is the last chance for us to deal with this problem," Andrew Weaver told the Montreal Gazette recently. Weaver is an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) contributor and author of Keeping Our Cool: Canada in a Warming World.

With the Arctic now melting faster than scientists had previously believed — possibly reaching 100 percent summer melting as early as 2013 — global climate change is pushing us toward a precipice. International consensus says that by 2050 it is "virtually certain" that temperatures will rise to 1.5° to 2°C, unless there are sharp carbon reductions. Every decade there is delay, experts say, temperatures will continue to rise by half a degree.

On the earth's surface, this temperature rise means that young people today will be living in a vastly re-shaped world when they are older. Thirty percent of species will be at risk of extinction; there will be widespread aridity and crop failure in the global south, where most of the Earth's population lives; and we will see up to 12 meters of sea level rise. That doesn't even get into the new geopolitical world we will be living in, with mass human migrations and conflict.

As we come to a close of the first decade of the 21st century, with emissions only rising, now, more than ever, is the time for action. People around the world en masse are calling for it. This year's Earth Hour had over eighty countries and one billion individuals participating, according to WWF Canada's Communications Director, Josh Laughren, who spoke about the Earth Hour event on the Green Majority radio show on April 10th. That's a huge leap forward from last year's Earth Hour, with 35 countries and between 50 and 100 million participants.

WWF is calling this year's Earth Hour a "global phenomenon." Earth Hour is meant as a symbolic action on the fight against global climate change. By dimming lights, people are voting for the earth and creating a mass demand for action.

However, US deputy special envoy for climate change, Jonathan Pershing, told the Reuters news agency that global climate agreements are complicated. "Finding common ground will take some time."

In domestic American politics, the situation is further complicated. With a recent Congress bill passed that now requires any cap-and-trade climate plan needing sixty votes to see the light of day. And with the two U.S. parties preoccupied with the economy, the prospects for a cap-and-trade bill looks dismal.

President Obama's election promise was to have swift action to combat climate change. the promises included cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 14 percent by 2020 and a cap-and-trade emissions plan. However, on the recent climate talk in Bonn, Germany, as part of a series of talks leading up to Copenhagen, delegates were disappointed with the U.S.'s vague and far-reaching plan to cap emissions. Obama's rapid action on climate now appears cautious and slow.

But slow and steady is a luxury we can no longer indulge in. And people around the world are making a stand for climate action now. At the recent G20 Summit in London, UK, 4,000 protesters were part of a "Climate Camp" protesting against the proposed cap-and-trade systems with slogans including "Nature Doesn't Do Bail-Outs." The activists argued that cap-and-trade is just another system for emitters to hide behind, while true emissions reduction remains on the back burner.

At the same G20 conference, over 20,000 protestors took over the streets of the central banking district, rioting about the economy. For many in Washington, this "separate" issue of the economy is often a fig leaf to hide more inaction on the climate. But economics and ecology are not two mutually exclusive entities. Rather, with a failing economy comes opportunity: opportunity for sustainability, with green industries and jobs, less dependency on oil, and more renewable energy.

Our world is out of check, but we have an opportunity for a sustainable one. Copenhagen is the first and last opportunity for Obama to make it so. But a slack pace will not get us there. Instead, we have 233 days — and the world is counting.

Eco Chamber #1: Past and future in Albany, Western Australia

March 26th, 2009

My heart was beating through my chest as I came within a feet of a harpoon ship and the lethal spike on its bow. But this was unlike the times I had come close to harpoon ships before. Coming back from covering an anti-whaling campaign in the Antarctic, ambushed and attacked by Japanese harpoon ships for weeks, you would think I would be used to seeing these gunner ships. However, this particular ship, the Cheynes IV, was apart of an old Australian whaling fleet and was now an on-land museum of Australian history. The harpoon ship was no longer operational, but my adrenaline kicked in nonetheless as I walked up to it.

Having finished my time onboard ship with Sea Shepherd, the radical anti-whaling campaigners who pursued the Japanese whaling fleet all winter, I took a road-trip down to Albany, Western Australia. A little over 30 years ago, a group of radical activists including my parents, Robert and Bobbi Hunter, protested Australia's whaling here. Leaving almost daily with two Zodiacs off of Albany's coast in September 1977, they were able to harass the Australian whaling fleet. Their protest lead to international attention on Australia's whaling, a national inquiry and the end of the whaling industry in Australia.

Today, Australia is one of the strongest anti-whaling nations in the world. It both supports anti-whaling groups like Sea Shepherd and lobbies against countries that continue to kill whales, such as Japan. And over 30 years later, what I found in Albany in my own visit was a beacon of change. The main industry today in the city eco-tourism and whale-watching. An industry that has brought more income to the city and its citizens than the whaling industry ever did. As tourists from around the world come to Albany to learn about whales and see the great animals alive.

The old whaling station and its harpoon ships in Albany, owned and operated by the Cheynes Beach Whaling Company, are relics of the past. It's now been turned into a museum called Whale World. There, visitors can venture through an old harpoon ship, the Cheynes IV, and the old whaling station, including its processing decks, boiler rooms, storage, and so on.

In Albany, organic local foods are the standard for residents. And the majority of Albany's energy is produced with green wind power, powering 75 percent of the city's energy needs with 12 1,800 KW wind turbines. Albany residents have lowered their greenhouse gas emissions by about 77,000 tonnes annually, which roughly equivalent to the annual emissions of 13,000 homes in the UK.

But out of all of this, the most surprising thing I experienced in Albany was to have an ex-whaler as my tour guide of the city. Kees Van der Gaag is a dutch whaler who came to Australia in 1969. As a master and gunner of the Cheynes II for the Cheynes Beach Whale Company between 1970 and 1977, he always enjoyed the chase but dreaded the kill. After a meeting of minds with anti-whaling protestors in 1977, he quit whaling and found work on a tugboat instead. Now retired and in his 70's, he is a stanch protestor against countries that continue to whale.

"It is horrifically cruel and completely unnecessary," Van der Gaag tells me. "I know better than most, because I used to be a gunner myself."

Whale meat, used in Australia for dog food and in the manufacture of missile lubricants 30 years ago, is not used for anything more crucial today in Japan. There, it is served in cafeterias in high schools, jails and military bases — and still used as dog food. Some things have changed, but others have stayed the same.

It always seems in environmentalist circles that as one battle is won, another one begins, or the larger war rages on undaunted. Counties like Australia, Canada and England no longer kill whales. This is primarily because of protests, such as the one in Albany 30 years ago, that led to international pressure and an international ban on commercial whaling (commercial whaling being the main culprit for landing the great whale species of the world on endangered-species lists in the first place). However, countries such as Japan and Iceland have pried open loopholes and commercial whaling still continues in some parts of the world. These days, nearly a thousand whales, including endangered species, are targeted every year in the Southern Ocean.

But even though the ecological battles of the past may seem lost at times and the eco-fight today is even more global and apocalyptic than ever before — there are symbols that we must hang on to. Albany is one of those symbols.

The city is proof that things can change. The jobs and industries of Albany have been partly transformed into a sustainable green economy. The city is doing better financially because of it. And the chief offenders themselves, the whalers, are now environmentalists. This all happened because of some pretty simple ideas. But those ideas drove people to action. Things have changed for the better in the past and can change again. But it is people, and it has always been people, that make the differance.

Polarized #16: Homeward bound

Feburary 20th, 2009

We received word that a commando ship was after us in the Antarctic Ocean. It was the night of February the 7th, and the Sea Shepherd ship, the Steve Irwin, had chased the Japanese whaling fleet for seven days and nights, stopping them from killing more whales. The chase had come to a climax the day before when there was a collision with the Sea Shepherd ship and a harpoon vessel. But our battle had to end now. News came through that a Japanese security ship would be in the area within a day. The goal of the commando: to board the Sea Shepherd vessel (potentially violently), arrest the crew and destroy video footage, as well as any photographic evidence we had of the hunt.

Many of us onboard wanted to keep fighting. We were willing to risk injury, arrest, perhaps our lives for the cause we had been pursuing since December. And the Sea Shepherd ships have always been expendable: they have been used in ramming and sinking vessels they oppose since 1977 (in non lethal ways, i.e. sinking ships in port with no crew aboard). But the real risk was to our cameras.

The camera has been a tool for change in the environmental movement for over 35 years. The footage we have now showcases the killing of whales, an illegal act in itself — but one that groups like Greenpeace have already shown the world. But we also had captured the whalers on film violating other laws, including their aggressive, violent, and potentially lethal tactics to harm people. The last few days' worth of events had provided a wealth of footage that the world needs to see.

To save our cameras, and to save the footage we've captured with them, might force more governments into action on the issue. So Captain Paul Watson decided to head away from the fleet. We headed southwest for McMurdo base, a U.S. research station near the Ross Ice Shelf (the largest free-standing ice mass on the planet — it's the size of Texas). Slowly, we lengthened the distance between us and the Nisshin Maru, the flagship of the Japanese whaling fleet. At first, we charted a course away from McMurdo, in order not to give away our destination and our course. By falling behind the fleet, it would look like we had mechanical problems and were still tailing the fleet, instead of leaving.

It was February 9th at 9 a.m. when we arrived at the Ross Ice Shelf. It appeared we had escaped the fleet unharmed and the ruse seemed to be working: the fleet had not whaled for another day after we left. It seemed we could relax and enjoy the Ross Ice Shelf, which is an amazing sight. It looks like an ice wall, glowing neon blue, that goes as far as the eye can see on either side of it. It towers a hundred feet above the water, so that you can't see the top of it without a helicopter. The ice goes 900 feet below the water line. We were ending the campaign on a high note, or so we thought.

Out of the fog ahead, we could see a ship. At first the spotters thought it was nothing, an Antarctic mirage. But it wasn't. We thought it might be a legitimate research vessel, a tourist boat, a supply ship — anything but the commando vessel after us. Luckily, it wasn't what we feared, but in a way it was just as bad: the mystery ship was a spotter vessel from the whaling fleet, the Kyoshin Maru 2. Instead of spotting for whales, it was now spotting for us.

Knowing our coordinates were being relayed to the fleet and commando ship, we left the Ice Shelf and ran full-tilt to McMurdo. But it soon became clear that wasn't going to be possible either: hard ice surrounded the base, and all other bases near the Ross Sea. At that point on February 9, Captain Watson decided to head due north to Australia. We would head straight for land and hope that the commando ship did not intercept us. We had no other choice.

I'm writing this 72 hours into our journey north, and we believe we're in the clear. At this point, if the fast commando ship were going to board us, they would have already done so. We are out of the area of the fleet and heading home.

The battle this year is over, but the war continues. Its a war for the whales, but its also for a larger ecology. This is a war because the political conflict over whaling has spurred dangerous confrontations this year, the most dangerous in the history of this conflict. The two sides battled it out for their opposing visions, and national leaders have also chimed in, condemning and condoning the actions of both sides. Some lives — the lives of whales, which Sea Shepherd believes have as much worth as human lives — have been lost, but others have also been saved. The activists could claim this much as victory, for now. But the war still rages on.

Polarized #15: Worlds, and ships, collide

Feburary 19th, 2009

The battle gets ugly. The whalers are desperate. Sea Shepherd keeps blocking the transfer of dead whales, making further whaling impossible in the Southern Ocean. The Sea Shepherd ship, the Steve Irwin, stays close to the stern of the whaling fleet's "mother ship," the Nisshin Maru, preventing any harpoon vessels from transferring their whale cargo to the processing ship.

Desperate for their product not to be spoiled as whales hang dead off the side of two harpoon ships, a third harpoon ship is sent to attack us. Yushin Maru No. 2 closes in on the Steve Irwin, coming within 20 feet. The crew throws metal bolts and uses high-pressured water-cannons on the Sea Shepherd crew. They send blasts from the Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD), the non-lethal — but extremely painful — sound cannon mounted on board. Then the Yushin cuts dangerously close across our bow several times, and finally, the two ships collide.

"It was a slight nudge, but gangster tactics if I have ever seen them," says Laurens De Groot, a policeman from Holland.

After hours of this chase, the Nisshin Maru ahead turns to circle around. The Irwin, as well as all the harpoon vessels follow, and it becomes a bit like a lethal marry-go-round. We went around in circles like this for hours, nearly causing me to get sick. But my adrenaline was pumping, which kept my seasickness at bay.

Eventually all the ships straighten out, at which point the harpoon boats carrying dead whales attempted to transfer their cargo, with us 100 metres away. The harpoon ships wedged their way between us and the Nisshin maru, and within seconds ropes and lines were being tossed back and forth between the Nisshin Maru and the harpoon ship to begin the transfer.

Unwilling to allow this to happen, Captain Paul Watson took the helm and attempted to get the Steve Irwin between the two vessels ahead, cutting the transport line in the process. Within twenty feet of the vessels, the Irwin shook wildly in their wake. Defiant and unafraid it appeared, the whalers stood their ground and successfully sent the whale up the Nisshin's slipway.

But all was not lost, sailors on board the Yushin Maru No. 3 were getting ready to hastilyy transport a second dead whale onboard. This would be the fifth whale delivered to the Nisshin if successful. We believed this would be the final straw — the whalers would know they could continue their illegal operation with or without the activists around.

Again the harpoon ship came alongside the Nisshin quickly and within seconds lines were being exchanged. Captain Watson steered the Irwin closer than ever, 15, perhaps 10 feet behind the ships ahead. He was attempting to wedge between the ships and cut the line: we were so close it looked like it would be successful. But then I saw it — the whale was in the water on its way to the slipway. Before I could turn to tell anyone, the Irwin was out of control from the choppy waves the harpoon ship produced.

Suddenly, the ship was ten degrees on its side.

Both ships had collided. It looked like each ship was halfway headed into the ocean and halfway up in the air. I was on portside, the side headed for the ocean. But all I could see was the starboard side up in the air. Water cannons were sprayed onto the crew of the Irwin from the harpoon vessel, while the Sea Shepherd activists threw rancid butter cans onto the decks of the harpoon ship. There was a lot of screaming and yelling from both ships, and the screeching of metal as the two vessels slid off each other. This truly felt like war.

Once our ship was off the harpoon vessel, the whaling ships steamed ahead. We fell back to check the damage. The crew found holes in the ship's hull, but they were all above the water line, and there were no serious injuries to the crew. We're safe — just barely. But the Sea Shepherd crew made their stand for the whales.

At that point, whaling stopped. The whalers did not attempt to kill or transfer any more that day. It was 6:30 pm and the battle had ended. But the war goes on.

Five whales lost their lives in this battle on February 6th. But many more would live, because forty individuals from around the world and one black ship made a stand against whaling at the bottom of the world. They stopped a six-ship whaling fleet and its 240 person crew in their illegal hunt for over five days, and put the government-run Japanese organization, the Institute of Cetacean Research, at a stand-still. And they cost the private company, Kyodo Senpaku, that profits off the hunt, tens of millions of dollars. They hurt the whaling industry by making its business less feasible.

Polarized #14: The killing starts again

Feburary 18th, 2009

It's 6:30 in the morning, I fall out of my bunk to the zigzagging motion of our ship and loud sirens coming from outside. I run to the bridge and see high-pressured water-cannons spray the entire port side of the ship. With our crew and my friends outside getting swamped by the water. We pass the Nisshin Maru, the 'mother ship' of the Japanese whaling fleet, on our port. Crew on our eco-ship toss over stink cans to contaminate the whalers decks. I find out from an officer that a whale has been killed under our watch. It's now being chopped up and packaged onboard the mother ship. The Sea Shepherds are fighting to stop it from continuing.

It's February 6th and after five days chasing the Nisshin Maru through the Antarctic Ocean, the fleet finally retaliated. For five days, Sea Shepherd had disabled the fleet's whaling operation by chasing the fleet's ships so they couldn't effectively hunt whales. But today, they tested their ground and killed a whale. The Sea Shepherd ship, the Steve Irwin, was two nautical miles away from the Nisshin Maru when it happened, making it impossible to stop.

One of the fleet's harpoon ships, the Yushin Maru No. 1, had a dead Minke whale lashed to its portside. Within minutes, the whalers transported the dead, bleeding carcass up the slipway to the Nisshin Maru for processing. In thirty minutes, there was nothing left of the whale but a spinal cord and the harpoon.

Keeping the processing ship, the Nisshin Maru, on the run had shut down whaling for eleven days during 2008's anti-whaling campaign by Sea Shepherd, and five days this year. But now the Sea Shepherd activists had to improvise a new strategy — and fast. The fleet was now whaling again, the very thing Sea Shepherd had come here to stop them from doing, and they were doing right it in front of us. We were no longer intimidating and the group had lost its ground in this whale battle.

Within two hours, the fleet had transferred two more dead whales to the Nisshin for processing. During this time, the Irwin was still narrowing its distance to the mother ship, but was unable to do anything but watch the blood and guts come pouring out of the "death ship" ahead. Reports of two more whales killed and on their way to the Nisshin come in from our helicopter in the air. But before they can be transfered, a plan is hatched.

"Blockade the stern. Allow no more whales to go up that slipway — that is our objective," says Paul Watson, captain of the Irwin and founder of Sea Shepherd. Blocking transfer would make killing any further whales impossible for the fleet. First Mate Peter Hammarstedt, a Swede, brings us within 200 meters of the mother ship's stern, blocking the fleet's transport. And stopping whaling once again. But will it work? For how long? Can we gain our ground back again in this whale war?

...Read Part Two in tomorrow's blog post.

Polarized #13: Human victims of the whale hunt

Feburary 13th, 2009

It is day 5 of chasing our target, the Nisshin Maru, the "mother ship" of the Japanese whaling fleet. On the message board near the ship's kitchen, it reads: "Five days of no whaling!" Every day that the Sea Shepherd ship has the mother ship on the run is another day the entire fleet (made up of six vessels) can't catch whales.

It's estimated that 10 to 12 whales are killed per day by the whaling fleet here in the Southern Ocean. Their quota for the season is nearly a thousand whales, including some endangered species. Day five of chasing means about 50 to 60 whales have been saved, And up to US$15 million has been lost to the Japanese whaling industry. It would appear we are winning the battle for the whales. In lives, minds and against destructive capital.

In these five days it hasn't been just a chase, but more like a running battle between our ship and the fleet. With any chance the Sea Shepherds have, they deploy their high-speed Zodiacs and helicopter to harass or gain evidence. Zodiac teams throw rancid butter cans and cellulose powder (a slippery substance) to contaminate the decks of the whaling ship. The helicopter captures video and photographic evidence of the illegal hunt.

The mother ship in return sends three harpoon ships to confront the Sea Shepherd vessel and its zodiacs. Maneuvering close to the Sea Shepherd boats in an attempt to intimidate, the boats' bows hammer down some 10-15 feet away from the zodiacs. Crew on the harpoon boats throw pieces of metal at the zodiac teams.

The harpoon vessels use something called a Long Range Acoustic Device when they came alongside the Steve Irwin. The LRAD produces powerful sound waves that penetrate the skull, muscles and body, and can cause disorientation, headaches and pain to the Sea Shepherd crew. One cameraman on one of the Zodiacs was hit by high-pressure water cannons, suffering an eye injury and disorientation.

A photographer from the UK, Steve Roest, was affected by the LRAD on another Zodiac, causing him to lose his balance and hit his head on the console. He suffered a cut to his forehead and recieved five stitches. By day five, almost half the crew has cuts and bruises of some kind, but they believe it's a small price to pay to prevent more whaling.

For years, Sea Shepherd's stated intention has been that they do not aim to harm any of the whalers, and they have interfered with whaling in this way for thirty years. Recently, the same cannot be said about the whalers themselves. The whaling vessels' responses over the past few days have not only been aggressive, but approaching lethal.

"They're not just looking to stop us, they are out for blood this year" says David Nickarz, the ship's third engineer who hails from Winnipeg.

Last year, in Sea Shepherd's confrontation with the mother ship, the captain was shot at and flash bangs were thrown at the crew. This year, the whalers have shown their intentions to harm again. But Sea Shepherd is unwilling to back down, so the battle for the whales continues, human blood-shed and all.

Polarized #12: The chase is on

February 11th, 2009

We had been told for days that confronting the Japanese whaling fleet could happen at any moment. A battle was imminent in the Southern Ocean. A final round in the war for the whales was beginning. Every day the crew on the Sea Shepherd ship, the Steve Irwin, believed "today was the day." But it never was.

I started to think the group had missed its chance. The fleet had escaped us, and there would be no stopping the whalers, and more whales would be taken this year. But on the morning of Sunday, February 1 the day came — the eco-battle began.

Sea Shepherd began their campaign to save whales last December. A campaign destined for the bottom of the world, Antarctica, aiming to stop a whaling fleet from Japan. Within the first leg of our voyage to the Southern Ocean, Sea Shepherd had intercepted three vessels: two harpoon ships and one spotter vessel.

None of these instances concluded with the victory they had hoped for. Their goal was to find the mother ship, the Nisshin Maru, an 8,000 tonne processing ship that works like a floating factory. Stopping the Nisshin Maru would effectively stop the entire whaling fleet. Unsuccessful in their first attempt to find her, Sea Shepherd embarked on the second leg of the mission after a short stop to refuel in Australia.

After eleven days at sea, at the beginning of February, the Sea Shepherd spotters found what they were looking for: At 10 a.m., they saw the Nisshin Maru and a harpoon ship 10 nautical miles ahead of the Steve Irwin. The chase began.

It was a slow chase at first, taking 18 hours to catch up to the mother ship. But even a long, slow chase was worth it for Sea Shepherd, since keeping the mother ship on the run is the main strategy for preventing more illegal catches. As long as the Nisshin Maru is running, the fleet isn't whaling.

A year ago, the Steve Irwin found the Nisshin Maru on February 3 and shut down whaling for 11 days using this tactic. About 500 whales were saved and the quota for the fleet was cut in half. This year, the Sea Shepherds plan to chase the mother ship until their fuel tanks run dry. It could prove to be a lengthy battle, but it's an important one. For now, the chase is on.

Polarized #11: Ending one battle, starting another

Feburary 4th, 2009

On January 29th, we have a crew meeting on the Sea Shepherd ship, the M/Y Steve Irwin, and the officers notify us that they believe we are close to the fleet. The final battle in southern ocean whaling could be near. After five years of anti-whaling campaigns in the Antarctic waters, three confrontations this year with whalers, it could finally all end. The Sea Shepherds' goal has been to stop the "mother ship" of the Japanese whaling fleet which would disable the entire fleet from operating. We now believe we are closing in on our target.

But as we near to the possible end of this whale war, news comes in that the war in the southern ocean could end through other means — and the whaling fleet could emerge as the victor. Information leaks that there have been secret meetings by six members of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), including the United States, Australia and Japan. The purpose of the meetings are to settle the issue of the legality the fleet's whaling activities and bring Japan back into the fold of international law.

If the present talks are realized, there would be a deal struck where Japan would be allowed to commercially kill whales, both coastally in Japan and in the North Pacific. Right now, Japan is attempting to catch 935 Minke whales and 50 Fin whales in the southern oceans. But this new possible deal would allow the Japanese whaling fleet to catch at a higher level than their present quota. The deal would mean that Japan would phase out their hunt in the Antarctic waters over the next five years by twenty percent per year.

It's a strange deal, because the fleet has been catching less than its stated quota for two years already. They have only been reaching 50 – 60 per cent of their quota, and that is already the cause of global protest. The IWC's moratorium on commercial whaling, established in 1986, has not been lifted. So allowing commercial hunting by Japan in this new deal would make the 1986 ban effectively moot. Such a deal would also then recognize that the so-called "research" hunt that Japan claims to have been running over the last eight years as a commercial one, with no repercussions.

Which leads to the question: why is environmental law established if it can just be turned upside down when it becomes inconvenient for one country? How is it that there is no enforcement or repercussion towards those that kill whales illegally? Why is it that the real eco-terrorists here, the whalers, are potentially going to be given carte-blanche to continue their activities?

So the southern ocean battle for the whales may end soon — just not in the way the Sea Shepherd activists had hoped for. Will this war ever end? It seemed earlier this year as if it might, but now, perhaps not, if this deal goes through. Regardless, Sea Shepherd will continue their fight for the whales, just as they have for 30 years. They will continue in the North Pacific and in the waters of Japan if they have to.

But when we've come so close to winning this war for the whales, it's hard to swallow for me that things have only come full circle, instead of to a sensible conclusion. My parents, co-founders of Greenpeace, began the fight for the whales in the North Pacific by targeting Russian and Japanese whalers. We believed we'd won the war in 1986 with the IWC ban, but it simply began again under the guise of "research" by Japan. The 21st-century activists believed we were close to finishing this war for good. But it could just be the beginning of another chapter.

Polarized #10: Shore leave

February 2nd, 2009

Sitting on green grass with my back resting on a tree, I pat the earth and look out at the calm world on a sunny day. The Sea Shepherd campaign I had been documenting for over a month, a campaign to save whales in the Antarctic waters, returned to land in mid-January to restock and refuel for a second trip to the southern ocean. Finding myself in Hobart, Australia, I took a break from the ship and crew I had lived with for the past 40 days at sea. But I was restless. After weeks on the heaving ocean, the land seemed calm — too calm. I think to myself: are people on land not aware of the war that has been raging south of them? The war for whales, the war for the fragile Antarctic ecosystem? Or were we on the ship too consumed by it, believing we had already won?

The reality is we have not yet won or lost. Despite the successes the Sea Shepherds had achieved in their whale-saving operations over the previous 40 days, the Japanese whaling fleet continues to operate, whales are still being harpooned, and the Sea Shepherds have not yet found their main target, the "mother ship" of the whaling fleet. However, there are real signs that this could be the year that southern ocean whaling is shut down.

"I'm very excited about this year, I believe this campaign could be the one that sets the course for shutting down the Japanese whaling fleet," says first mate Peter Hammerstedt, as he readies the ship for the second leg to the Antarctic ocean.

On the Sea Shepherds' first trip the southern ocean, they confronted the whalers three times: twice with harpoon ships and once with a spotter vessel. Confrontations included a ramming, rancid butter cans thrown on the whalers' decks, and intimidation by circling whaling vessels. Ultimately they put the hunters on the run for over three weeks with their radical tactics.

"Every day the whalers are on the run means another day they cannot kill whales. This not only saves lives but costs the fleet as they only have so many days out here to make their catch. Losing economically could mean the end of this industry," says Hammerstedt.

Limiting the whalers' quota is one goal of the Sea Shepherds. The other is to put the whaling vessels themselves out of commission. Both goals appeared to have been achieved as news came through that the Yushin Maru No. 2 (a harpoon ship) had propeller damage after a confrontation with the Sea Shepherd on December 20th. Having no choice, the harpoon ship had to stop at the closest port to be repaired, in Surabaya Harbour, Indonesia. It left the whaling fleet with one less "killing ship" while the Yushin Maru seeks repairs.

News of another set-back to the fleet surfaced with weather readings forecasting a "red" storm in the southern ocean while while we were docked in Australia. A red storm means 50-knot winds, 15 metre swells, hail and poor visibility — all swamping the area the whaling fleet was operating in. The storm would make whaling impossible. So while the Sea Shepherds themselves had to abandon the battleground temporarily, it appeared the forces of nature took over for them.

"The whalers are having a bad year. We found them within their first week of whaling, chased them, cost them and now they are in a violent storm unable to whale. Soon the storms will rest and we will be back there to stop them," says Hammerstedt.

On January 21, the Sea Shepherd crew began their second trek down south to confront their main target: the Nissin Maru. This is the mother ship that processes the whales and without this ship, the rest of the whaling fleet cannot operate. Their goal, to end southern ocean whaling, could very well be realized in the next month.

Polarized #9: Spy vs. Spy

January 27th, 2009

After leaving the search and recovery scene of the Japanese whaling fleet's missing man, Sea Shepherd headed for Australia. The plan was to refuel within 48 hours and return to the southern ocean to stop illegal whaling vessels. The trip back to land became a little more complicated as the Steve Irwin was tailed by a spy ship.

Late last year, on December 7th the spy ship was confirmed to be the 'Yushin Maru No. 3,' a harpoon ship in the Japanese whaling fleet. Most likely, it was sent by the fleet to track the Irwin's position to try to gain the upper hand by making the anti-hunters into the hunted.

A year ago, the tactical move of the 'spy ship' had been first used by the fleet sending the Fuki Yoshi out to the high seas. The Fuki Yoshi had no purpose to the fleet — it was not a harpoon ship, a spotter vessel, assisting to or acting as a processing ship. Its sole purpose appeared to be a sort of protest tracker ship, following such groups as the Sea Shepherds in their anti-whaling campaign.

Declaring harassment, the captain and founder of Sea Shepherd, Paul Watson, maneuvered to end the reversal of roles. Up until last year, Sea Shepherd has been the stalker while the whalers have been the stalked — not the other way around. Watson hid the 'Irwin' behind an iceberg wall readying the crew and ship for a surprise attack. Within minutes the ship's two Zodiacs, the small high-speed inflatable boats, were deployed. The mission of the crew on the Zodiacs were to spray the harpoon ship with stink cans, dyes and a slippery substance. These moves would contaminate the decks of the whaling ship and make it impossible for them to hunt any whales for days, perhaps weeks.

The Irwin's helicopter hovered over the Yushin Maru taking aerial photography and reporting on the whalers' actions. At 1300 hours, the pilot reported that the Yushin was returning to the fleet before the Zodiacs could reach them. The Sea Shepherds had gained their hunter status again. The Zodiacs were sent back to the Irwin as a storm was moving in, and the helicopter also returned as eight meter swells, a fog bank and volatile winds took over. With no further spy ships on radar the Sea Shepherds continued onwards toward land.

Polarized #8: Death at sea

January 19th, 2009

Imagine falling off a boat in the Antarctic waters wearing only overalls and a shirt. You yell and throw your arms about in hopes that someone on your ship will notice you. It's nighttime, and not a single person sees you. You watch your life slip away as the ship sails off into the mist. Your body begins to twitch, you lose the feeling in your body, but a warmness takes over and you begin to sleep. Within the hour you dream and never wake up again. This was the end that Hajime Shirasaki recently met.

On Monday, January 5th, in the evening, Shirasaki, an engineer on the 'Kyoshin Maru 2,' a spotter vessel for the Japanese whaling fleet, fell overboard. It was not until six hours after he fell that he was reported missing to New Zealand Search and Rescue. He was 30 years old with family back home.

"That is probably one of the worst ways to die," says Jane Taylor, an American ex-marine on board a Sea Shepherd ship, "and is also one of the most common ways to die at sea. Almost regularly there have been man-overboards in the Navy. It can happen to anyone — professionals, amateurs, or to activists."

For Sea Shepherd, who sailed their ship to the southern ocean to oppose whaling vessels like the Kyoshin Maru, the news changed the group's course. There had been manoeuvers to return to port for Sea Shepherd after a month at sea searching for illegal whalers and confronting two ships. The fuel on our ship, the Steve Irwin, was low, and Sea Shepherd would have to return to land to refuel before continuing. However, with news of a search and rescue operation, Sea Shepherd changed course to assist the search-and-rescue efforts.

This was not the first life-threatening event for the Japanese whaling fleet. In the last ten years, there have been three fires on the fleet's flagship, the Nissin Maru — one fire in the southern ocean claimed a life in winter 2007. In the spring of that same year, an industrial accident in Japan took another.

In Shirasaki's case, he was declared dead by the afternoon of January 6th. On the night of that same day, Sea Shepherd found itself in the middle of the whaling fleet. Captain Paul Watson offered the ship's helicopter and services for a recovery operation.

The Kyoshin Maru's captain responded angrily with a radio transmission saying: "We do not want your help, we do no want the help of eco-terrorists, stay away!"

For the crew on the Sea Shepherd ship it is painfully clear that they are here to save whales, not harm or terrorize people. They feel that "eco-terrorist" is an unfair label that deflects attention from the ones really making the problems for our planet, and endangering their crew's lives.

Canadian activist Shannon Mann says: "We lent out our hands to the whalers despite our differances to help in this man's recovery. We're not here to hurt people. I think we have made that clear. Our goal here is to save life, not the other way around. How does that make me or any other crew here a terrorist?"

On the bridge of the Sea Shepherd ship, Paul Watson radioed back: "out of respect for your loss, we will not interfere with you or assist in the recovery operation as you request. But once you go back to whaling, we will come back to stop you."

The crew on Sea Shepherd applauded and hollered loudly on the bridge after his transmission. Kaori translated the captains message. The media got their footage of a bold moment from the captain. And we turned and headed north, back to Australia to refuel. Watson's words were a promise: The Sea Shepherds plan to return within weeks to resume the fight againstsouthern ocean whaling. For, as many here say, they're here "not to hurt life, but to save life."

Polarized #7: The Life Aquatic

January 15th 2009

New Year's is celebrated at dawn, as the sun never sets in the Antarctic at this time of year. (The countdown slips one minute past midnight, since none of the crew has a watch on.) We celebrate on the of bow of ship, our knees shaking and our arms flexing as the motion of the ocean tosses us about. Cheers, laughter, hugs and some secret whispers like 'I love you' are passed around as we toast in the new year. I toast to my late father, wherever he may be. We throw a single wine bottle corked with our new years resolutions off the side of the ship. Some ask for the love they share with another crew member to last. Others wish for success in the school year, or for a family member to be well. But the one wish above all that unites our crew is: to end southern ocean whaling this year by intercepting the Japanese whaling fleet.

This is how the eco-activist crew on board a Sea Shepherd vessel celebrate their new year in Antarctic waters. Sacrificing their holidays is a small price to pay to be apart of a whale saving campaign for many of the crew. The loss of the annual eggnog drinking, a family dinner and an arbitrary countdown doesn't bother them. What does is the annual illegal killing of whales in the southern ocean by a fleet heavily subsidized by the Japanese government. And that is what they hope to end this year.

One thing that does weigh on many of the crew's minds are the tension between their lives back home on land, and their lives out here at sea. One UK man on board had to quit his job to join the expedition. It was a type of 'big brother' program where he helped young impoverished boys keep off the streets — a job that was near and dear to his heart. For an American engineer, he struggles between his marriage and his "true life's work" as an environmental activist, and being away on these kinds of trips for months at a time has strained his marriage. For a Dutch woman, she fights with her deteriorating health to remain an asset, and not a liability, to the ship. A Canadian student feels torn between her environmental activism and her work as an academic.

There are numerous other tensions that come with being a Sea Shepherd activist. From the pains and ills of being seasick, the always present threat of a confrontation with the whalers that could happen at any moment, to living a restricted lifestyle in terms of food, showering, sleeping, and dealing with the social complexity of living with 43 other people in a confined space for months on end. For many of the crew, they have given up their lives back home to be a part of a 'whale saving lifestyle' while for others, they have given it up for a little while and will return to life on land soon. For all the hardships, there are benefits to life on the ship, too. With a crew from around the world with a diversity of backgrounds, everyone learns from one another. For example, Laurens, a Dutch cop, teaches self defense classes; Kaori Tanaka, a Japanese student, gives Japanese language lessons.

Artistic talent too blossoms on the ship. Those that can draw color the ship's logbook with images that remind us of how beautiful Antarctica is. The musicians take out their banjos, didgeridoo and acoustic guitars to play. The photographers show us slide shows of our expedition. Even the engineers come out of the woodworks to weld and cut metals, making whale-related arts and crafts projects like whale bottle openers.

We also organize events to buoy morale. Talent show contests are among the favorite events on the ship, an event where crew display their abundantly colorful nature. We've seen Bollywood dance routines, 'Rocky Horror Show' skits, poetry reading, Karate moves, even staring contests (seeing who can go longest without blinking). We celebrated Christmas a few weeks ago with a Secret Santa gift exchange: One gift was a voucher for someone else's shower time; vegan condoms for a couple; a hand-made whale-shaped pillow; and even a ride in the ship's helicopter on a reconnaissance mission. Birthdays, as well as anniversaries, are celebrated with speeches or cakes.

It becomes a life of its own at sea on board an activist ship. We gossip in the galley. The engineers, in their time off, play Scrabble, Pictionary, and Boggle. The deckhands, mostly boys, act like brothers, wrestling and roughhousing. On the bridge watch, we are entertained by the Captain, who sings 400-year-old ballads from memory. We watch movies together, including the movies 'Happy Feet' and 'The Life Aquatic' (which we consider to be about us). There's a surprisingly big fan base on the ship for the TV show 'Nip/ Tuck.'

Our own TV show, 'Whale Wars,' season two of which is currently being filmed on board the ship, puts all our lives on display. The drama factor is increased by having the cameras around: Cameramen follow the crew's every move and interview them frequently. Smaller 'spy cameras' continuously film many of the rooms onboard. It's like living on the set of a reality show like 'Big brother,' and many of the crew find themselves editing what they say and do for the cameras.

Like all small, tight-knit groups, Sea Shepherd has a culture of its own, that can be hard to understand for outsiders. What makes them distinctly different is a new year's resolution that unites them, despite their differences: A resolution to end Antarctic whaling.

Polarized #6: Collision course

January 12th, 2009

Clinging onto the very tip of the bow on Sea Shepherd’s eco-activist ship, I stare into the fog with desperation. Looking for any shape, figure or shadow that resembles the vessel we have been waiting weeks to find. I could almost smell a ship’s diesel fumes, but not see them. The Sea Shepherd ship steamed ahead through a sharp icefield purely focused on reaching this mystery ship. I was to give the hand signal to the crew on our bridge once I could identify what lay ahead. Fifteen minutes away, 0.4 miles in range, 10 minutes, 0.3 miles, 8 minutes, 7 minutes... I start to see ripples in the calm sea: they are made by the wake of the ship ahead. The lines get bigger and wider — it must be right in front of us now. Something dark looms in the mist, a shape starts to form, a slip-way I can see, a ship, a white ship with Japanese lettering — it reads Kaiiko Maru. It's a whaling vessel.

After sixteen days at sea, Sea Shepherd found its second whaling vessel in the Antarctic. The first ship was found five days before Christmas, a harpoon vessel called the Yushin Maru 2. Today, on Boxing Day, we've found a spotter vessel named the Kaiiko Maru. Both vessels are a part of the Japanese whaling fleet, aimed at hunting 1,000 whales at the south pole. And both vessels faced the wrath of Sea Shepherd's fight for the whales. But unlike the Yushin, the Kaiiko fought back.

At 6:30pm, activists on board Sea Shepherd found a target. Within the hour, the crew was in position ready for an attack, the ship was gaining on the Kaiiko and a team, including me, searched into the mist from the bow to identify our quarry. Once the Kaiiko was visible to all of us, the Sea Shepherd ship quickly came alongside the Kaiko’s port side for a Boxing Day surprise. Crew on the Kaiiko level to us on our bow turned to us in shock to see our boat nestling up beside them. In a panic they closed doors, turned their faces away from our cameras, and ran inside, bracing for a conflict.

On the Sea Shepherd, teams of two planted themselves at the bow, the bridge deck and the monkey deck (the highest deck of the ship) readying with various bottles. Bottles filled with rancid butter, dyes and methyl cellulose (a slippery substance) that would contaminate the decks of the whaling ship for days to weeks, making whaling impossible. Within seconds of passing the Kaiiko Maru, the Sea Shepherd activists throw the bottles. They're experienced shots, after weeks of practice with organic compost balls. Two, four, six, eight bottles shatter on the Kaiiko’s decks. Only two miss their target.

But the Kaiiko does not sit idly: instead, they retaliate. The Kaiiko comes in close — so close that on the bow we could have easily walked onto their deck. Suddenly, I remember the rammings from previous Sea Shepherd campaigns I had been on. In previous instances, I'd never been on the bow during one of these collisions, but I can see the Kaiiko isn't turning away. I yell to my team to "brace for impact." We all hold onto something, anything, and I grab for the anchor chain — maybe not the best choice. Screech, thump, bang! The Kaiiko struck, scrapping our port side and pulverizing one of our helicopter guard rails.

Unafraid, Captain Paul Watson at the helm turns our ship in circles around the Kaiiko. Once, twice, three times around we go. On the third turn, we just miss their stern to our bow. Their ship crosses for the last time. The two ships are so close their two crews can get a good look at each other. I stand on the bow and I stare one man in the eye as he stares back. I don't sense hate, but instead curiosity in our exchange. He probably wonders why I am doing this, fighting against his job. I wonder why he is doing this, whaling. We are from two very different worlds, a pro-whaling world and an anti-whaling world, meeting one another for the first time without words in an ecological war. I wonder in that moment: can we come to a middle ground? A ground where jobs are kept but an ecological destruction is curbed?

Minutes go by. The Kaiiko turns southeast and we let them go, to continue onwards in pursuit of the rest of the fleet. The Captain looks like a kid on Christmas morning, as happy as can be. The Kaiko’s decks are contaminated, making at least part of the whaling fleet inoperable and surely putting the rest of the fleet on notice that we are in pursuit. The crew exchange the stories of their individual experiences. High fives, hugs and even some kisses go around. The press releases get written and media calls begin. The world begins to find out about round two.

"In this game, Sea Shepherd got 2, Whalers 0," says David Nickarz, an engineer and activist from Canada.

Sea Shepherd is knee-deep in the whale wars now. The question is, will they find the Queen Bee that they need to confront to win this battle, the "mother ship," called the Nissin Maru, without getting too badly stung themselves?

Polarized #5: Neptune's the boss around here

January 5th, 2009

From the engine room the steel frame of our ship looks like Jell-O: the Razor-sharp ice chunks, called ‘growlers,’ hammer at the metal ship as we try to pave a path of escape, and they make the ship flex from the outside in. Fears of a breach creep in: we tell nervous jokes about the Titanic to ease the tension, additional metal is welded onto the hull for extra insurance, and even the experienced captain, who takes the helm and with whom we trust our lives, has a worried look in his eyes.

“It would take anywhere between 30 minutes to several days for the ship to sink depending on the damage,” engineer Dave Nickarz, from Winnipeg, tells me while on the bridge.

It's not entirely reassuring, considering that we are in the Antarctic waters with few willing to stick their necks out to rescue a radical conservationist ship that is owned by Sea Shepherd. Labelled as ‘eco-terrorists’ by many diplomats and governments, their tactics include ramming vessels in the open ocean, boarding ships, and throwing stink bombs at those they oppose.

Few can stop them in their determination to save marine wildlife: Not harsh criticism by politicians, media and the public; not court cases, investigations or interrogations; not even underwater missile shots by the Norwegian navy, boat raiding by the Canadian coast guard off the east coast, or tear gas attacks by the Faroese.

The only thing that does seem to stop them is the god of the seas himself, Neptune. When he decides to let us see, there is up to 14 miles of visibility in every direction. When he decides to blind us, the fog can take over and we don't even see past our own bow. When he decides to cradle us, being tied up to port can feel more of a disturbance than the calm gliding through the sea. When he decides to dance with us, it is like the dance of Shiva, the god of destruction and creation. Evidently, in recent days, Neptune's been in a bad mood, and we've been battered by ice and waves.

It's kind of ironic: trying to beat back mother nature’s wrath to save her, her great leviathans of the sea, that is. Hours turn into days as the boat keeps getting cut off from its prey, the whalers, by walls of ice. Turning east, then west, northeast, then southwest. Zigzagging in a maze that seems inescapable.

Today, the fog diminishes, we can see. The dance of destruction with the seas turns into gentle cradling. The ice finds others to enslave. Neptune sets us free. And Sea Shepherd marches to its ecological battlefield.

Polarized #4: The storm before the storm

December 29th, 2008

It's five days until Christmas for environmental activists in the Antarctic Oceans. Most of them have sacrificed annual quality time with their families in their warm, safe homes this year. Instead, they've opted to sail around the southern oceans in wet, stormy, and extremely cold conditions in the hopes of tracking and stopping illegal whaling. A noble cause, many would say, but one that comes with few perks — except for one. The one Christmas present they wanted came early this year. The activists onboard the Sea Shepherd vessel, the M/Y Steve Irwin, found a whaling ship this morning.

At 10:15am on Saturday, December 20th, activists onboard the Sea Shepherd's ship spotted an unidentified vessel on radar. They believed that the vessel they spotted was a whaling ship; their aim this winter is to stop illegal whaling in the southern oceans and they had their first opportunity to do just that this morning.

The Steve Irwin aimed to intercept the mystery target but faced a beast of a storm, with 20-foot swells in the ocean, 50 mile per hour winds, blinding hail, and a mine-field of floating ice. Astonishingly, in less than an hour, they found the ship: it was one of the harpoon vessels of the Japanese whaling fleet — the Yushin Maru 2. The same ship that two Sea Shepherd activists had boarded a year previous to give the whalers a letter notifying them that their actions were illegal. An action that kept the activists hostage on the ship for two days, and stirred an international incident.

But this year would be different. The Yushin Maru was prepared for Sea Shepherd. Readying for an interception once Sea Shepherd's ship was visible to them, whalers instantly began deploying a large net across the starboard side of their vessel disabling a second-year boarding from happening.
"[As they readied the net,] they were smiling at us, it was like they know our game and are playing it now," said Amber Paarman, a 24-year old South African activist onboard.

The Sea Shepherds responded by sending out a Zodiac, their small high-speed inflatable, to throw rancid butter onto the decks of the harpoon ship. In an attempt to stink the decks of the Yushin Maru, making it impossible to kill any whales without contamination. The Irwin vessel continued onwards to chase the Yushin. But due to worsening weather conditions, with swells growing to 40 feet high, the Zodiac was called to return and the chase ended.

Heading due north in the direction of the Yushin, Captain Paul Watson called their bluff and is continuing elsewhere in the direction of the whaling fleet.

"They did this to us last year," says Watson. "They send one ship in an entirely different direction of where the whaling fleet is as a decoy hoping to fool us while the fleet heads elsewhere. But not this year. I call their bluff. We're not following their trickery."

Sea Shepherd is continuing to patrol the southern oceans in hopes that they are close to the whaling fleet. They intend to cease illegal whaling in the Antarctic waters using any and all means that do not injure human lives.

The battle for the whales has begun.