Sharks with Frickin' Lasers - The Website

Wait, there's a website?

Of course there's a website, you don't think a new fin clip innovation that will revolutionize shark research as we know it would rely on a few images in three thousand print media outlets plus mainstream media video to make the case did you?

Never.

Oh, and by the way enjoy. No sharks were harmed, inconvenienced, delayed, disrespected, and or annoyed in the making of this video. As it turns out Mr.Biggelsworth has a bit of a thing for our buddy Luke Tipple.

The Mr Biggelsworth Website

The Mr Bigglesworth Facebook Page

The only shark on the planet with this much pro-shark media around him. How's that for amazing?

Brave or brainless? Shark swimmer's rising profile

We blogged about maverick shark diver Mark Rutzen a while ago. Now some in the media and in the blog world are beginning to ask the same questions:

Diver Mark Rutzen is increasingly making a name for himself across the globe as a man who's willing to get closer to sharks than any other.The free-diver and former fisherman, who is currently diving off the coast of South Africa with Great Whites, touches and even rides the massive predators - in the wild.

Rutzen says the key to staying alive is a matter of manners.

"You have to introduce yourself to the animal, you can't just go up to it and grab hold of it," he told News Ltd. "The biggest mistake any free-diver could make would be chasing the animal through the water."

Rutzen says he relies on experience and a "telepathic understanding" to avoid becoming a meal.

Editors Note: After reading that last statement Rutzen is beginning to sound like both Erich Ritter who once claimed he could swim with big bull sharks after slowing his heart beat down-and Tim Treadwell who claimed he could walk with Grizzlies after adopting their posture. Fact is these animals allow us access on their terms and their terms only. It is a matter of time and one fatal decision on the part of the animal that always changes this equation.

"Just because you can do a thing-does not mean you should".

Shark Attack-Ahem, "Mistake" off Catalina

If there's one thing that we fail to understand here at Underwater Thrills are the new media savvy individuals in our industry who are attempting to re-categorize pretty straightforward shark events.

Case in point-"Shark attacks" vs "Shark mistakes".

When sharks attack people, vessels, man made objects, or anything that is not primary or secondary food sources these new media folks rush in and quickly brand the event as a "shark mistake".

Tragically, sometimes these "mistakes" end the lives of the "victims", a term we're pretty sure will be soon be changed to UPP's or "unwilling predatory participants".

This current school of thought goes as far as stating "if the shark fails to actually remove a part of its victim, then what you have is a "shark mistake". For the sake of reality, let's get back to basics here and recognize that sharks are first and foremost predators. In the same category as bears, wolves, tigers and crocodiles.

Yes, we know sharks are not actively hunting humans.

To suggest that sharks make "mistakes", is to suggest an intelligence far higher then they have been tested for. It is also done to lower the threshold for interactions with these animals. These animals do occasionally attack, they are predatory. Divers seeking encounters with them should first and foremost understand this and move away away from the notion of a "shark mistake". Encounters with these animals should always have safety as the foremost consideration.

99.9% of all commercial encounters with these animals are safe. That's an amazing statistic all things considered. One that proves sharks are for the most part uninterested in humans. But when they occasionally attack, they attack. Plain and simple.

Oh, and by the way-there was a "shark mistake" off Catalina last week involving a Kayak and a white shark. As far as we can tell from reports this latest "mistake" had enough power behind it to completely toss the unwitting kayaker out of her kayak.

Fortunately, she did not become a "unwilling predatory participant" and swam safely to shore.

Sharks and The U.K Media

The Times recently covered shark attacks worldwide with a completely hysterical and not surprising bias. The following quotes were taken from that article.

By employing broad unsupported statements about sharks and the use of the classic "but experts have said" they continue to propagate fear in the reader about sharks. What we have here is a failure to communicate.

Quotes from the article:

1. " Another theory suggests that the killer shark off California may have been trying to protect a newborn pup".

2. "But experts have said that great white females are more likely to eat their offspring than protect them".

3. " Some argue that thriving seal populations are attracting sharks to tourist areas, especially during March and April when female sharks arrive in the warmer waters between California and Mexico to give birth".

When will media begin to report these unfortunate events from the sharks P.O.V?

Paul Watson Shot? Wait a Minute!

Something is not right about the latest action on the Southern Ocean. At hand claims and even a video showing what looks like a shot through a bullet proof vest worn by Sea Shepherd's Captain Paul Watson.

In this video he claims to have taken a direct round to the heart region. For all intents it looks like he has, with the bullet passing deeply into the vest only to be stopped dramatically by a shield he was wearing below the vest.

The media are having a field day with this.

Now let's break this one down.

1. The shooter, presumably firing from the Nisshin Maru, was in a concealed position when he fired that shot. Not one of the Sea Shepherd crew maintain they saw anyone with a rifle on board. So let's assume concealment as being out in the open would have given the shooter away.

2. Both the Nisshin Maru and the Sea Shepherd vessel were underway at the time and on moving seas. The shooter had to adjust not only for random waves and distance, but from a concealed position had to account for wind, also assuming that Watson was moving around as well at the time.

3. To make that one shot, and were not talking about a stationary book depository in Dallas, the odds are almost incalculable that the shooter got Waston directly over the heart with just one single round. It's a simply amazing shot.

Now for the real question, "why?"

Why would the Japanese government risk everything by trying to kill Captain Paul Watson?

Clearly had this shot killed Watson they would have lost everything they have worked for to date with the International Whaling Commission and with world opinion. Watson would have become a Whale Martyr and whaling as we know it would stop due to unprecedented pressure from outraged group worldwide. What was in it for Japan to even attempt to try and kill this extremely high profile whale activist in full sight of multiple cameras and witnesses?

They did use flash bang grenades and it was caught on tape, but the single shot?

Kevlar and Ballistic Vests

To penetrate a Kevlar or ballistic vest from a distance you need at least a 7.62 mm round. Obvious choices would be military rounds with some sort of armor piercing capability. That is assuming the shooter knew that Watson was wearing a bullet proof vest in the first place. Obviously from the penetration the shooter understood this, otherwise this kind of round would have passed through Watson and rattled around the ship.

The Point?

We'll be the first to say that what Japan is doing is wrong. Whaling should end. What Watson and Sea Shepherd have done with this claim is raise the credibility stakes of both sides to an absolute win or lose scenario.

Japan and Waston should call for an independent commission to look at both the vest and the recovered spent round to determine where it came from and what type of round it was. If it is proven that the round was fired by the Japanese they should be forced to end whaling. This was attempted murder, nothing more or less.

If Paul Watson made this story up, the credibility of Sea Shepherd will be forever lost, their status as a non profit should be pulled, and Sea Shepherd should go away.

Time will tell, but probably not the shooter in this case, whoever it was.

SharkDiver.Com and the Media

When you have a shark diving company like ours you get hit with media requests almost daily.

Recently we just completed a three part article for a German Magazine due out in April. The trick with working with the media is credibility. Never do anything that makes you, the sharks, or your operation look like an idiot. This is just Media 101.

That's a trick here is most media sources come to you with a basic Discovery Channel understanding of how sharks work. It's our job to introduce them to an expanded view of things.

In all media is fun to work with and we have been blessed to work with some of the greats over the years producing what amounts to a massive amount of positive press for both us and the sites we operate in.

After all, we're on the front lines of not only shark research, as is the case of our Isla Guadalupe site, but if we say so ourselves, we run a pretty cool little operation as well.