The Cruelty and Illegality Of Killing Sharks for Fins

Jakarta Globe, Lida Pet-Soede, September 16, 2012

Indonesia is the top shark-catching country in the world, which stokes concern
over the cruel and wasteful act of shark-finning. (EPA Photo/Hotli Simanjuntak)

Related articles

• Online Petition Draws Attention To Indonesia’s Shark Fin Shame
• Surfer Survives Bloody Shark Attack in Remote Western Australia
• Threatened Shark Species Turning Up in US Restaurants: Study
• Tagging Whale Sharks Like Pet Pooches
• Great White Shark ‘Protected’ Status Questioned

A recent report by wildlife trade monitoring group Traffic shows that Indonesia continues to be the biggest shark-catching country in the world, based on UN Food and Agricultural Organization data.

Indonesia’s average annual reported shark catch in the past decade represents more than 13 percent of the reported global catch. Up to 65 percent of Indonesia’s catch is taken from the Pacific Ocean and the remainder from the Indian Ocean. In the Indian Ocean, Indonesia owns the major shark fleets, with average catches fluctuating between 8,500 to 16,500 tons per year in recent years. 

Most sharks are predators in coral reef and ocean ecosystems, sitting on top of the food pyramid and helping control the balance of the marine environment.

Losing one of these predators leads to uncontrolled population growth of other species. Sharks eat sick or wounded organisms to help maintain the ecosystem’s health. Without them, the entire food chain would collapse.

The practice of shark-finning has drawn a lot of attention and reactions. And since social media has made it even easier to report incidents, tourists and divers are now able to post their holiday observations.

Likewise, the progress made in the United States and Hong Kong on increasing consumer awareness and the reduced availability of shark-fin soup in restaurants are also receiving a lot of media attention. There is now an increasing outcry for governments to stop shark-finning.

“Finning” is a callous and careless practice in which sharks are caught, their fins sliced off, and their bleeding bodies thrown back into the water where they die a slow and painful death. Not only is this a cruel practice, it is illegal, inefficient and a waste of food resources.

Scientists have also joined the international community’s call for urgent action on the shark-fishing industry, acknowledging that the market for shark fins will continue to grow because increased buying power will create a bigger consumer base. On top of that, target species in shark fisheries grow slowly and mature late with few offspring, hence they are easily overfished.

The Indonesian government has had few legal tools in the past decades to prohibit or restrict shark fishing. Traffic suggests that the increase in shark and ray fishing in Indonesia has outgrown existing fisheries management approaches.

The only regulation and law enforcement related to shark fisheries and shark products was for sawfish and the implementation of the regulations was only applied to monitoring and banning the rostrum trade rather than to regulate trade of other parts of the body as it was considered too difficult to identify the species.

Pursuant to its membership in the UN Food and Agricultural Organization, Indonesia was mandated to develop a national plan to protect sharks. Recognizing the importance of developing management regulations specific to shark fisheries, a research project funded by the Australian Center for International Agricultural Research on artisanal shark and ray fisheries in Eastern Indonesia and their relationships with Australian resources, was undertaken in 2004 to develop a national plan of action.

The plan identifies key issues for shark and ray management in Indonesia and broad strategies to address these as well as the competent authorities. However, there are two big challenges underlying the implementation of the plan for sharks.

First is the considerable illegal shark fishing in Indonesian waters and some cases of corruption on the part of those charged with enforcement, and second is the predominance of the artisanal sector in shark catch.

Without the willingness to change, and without any strong legal basis to protect sharks and ban finning, the national plan of action for sharks is not being implemented.

Recently, the directorate of fisheries resources at the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries agreed to promulgate regulations — but not until 2013.

WWF is identified as a partner in implementing the initiatives identified in the plan. We examined the laws on animal welfare and protection, and determined that even without a viable national plan of action, certain provisions of existing laws on animal welfare could be applied to implement a ban on shark-finning now. 

The two most prominent laws that support a ban on shark-finning are the Indonesian criminal code and Law No. 18/2009 on husbandry and animal health.

Article 302 of the Indonesian criminal code prescribes imprisonment for up to nine months for anyone guilty of maltreatment of animals, which means anyone who “without reasonable objective or by overstepping what is permissible in reaching such objective, with deliberate intent” commits an act toward an animal resulting in illness longer than one week, mutilation, serious harm or death.

Clearly, finning is a mutilation, and even if one were to argue that harvesting of shark fin for soup is a “reasonable objective,” finning can hardly be considered a permissible way to achieve it.

Law No.18/2009 on husbandry and animal health contains potent provisions on animal welfare that clearly apply to sharks. Sharks are “animals” and “wild animals” under the law. The law’s definition of animal welfare is to protect animals “from any unreasonable action … against an animal that is beneficial to human beings.” Article 66 states that animals must be kept free from ill treatment, torture and misuse, subject to penalty. “Misuse” is defined as obtaining “satisfaction and/or profit” from animals by utilizing them “unreasonably,” e.g., “pulling out a cat’s claw.” Cats can live without their claws; sharks cannot live without their fins.

Provisions on animal welfare apply to “all types of animals that bear backbone,” and even to spineless animals that can feel pain, such as crabs. If crabs are entitled to fair treatment, surely sharks deserve legal protection from finning.

While the well-being argument will surely raise many eyebrows in a country where sharks are seen as man-eaters, and pro-poor development strategies are not supportive of restricting access to more or less free-for-all natural resources, the public should be aware that it is illegal, under existing animal welfare laws, to fin sharks, and that the government has neglected its obligation to implement the national plan of action.

Proper management regulations on shark fisheries need to be enforced, allowing only for quota-based culling of shark populations that are not at an overfished level.

In absence of any such comprehensive data, the government should consider completely banning all shark fishing, allow for stocks to recover, develop a meaningful stock monitoring program and only allow for shark fishing of species that are proven to be in healthy stock status, by communities in coastal areas with small-scale gear, in support of sustainable fisheries and livelihoods of those who need it most. It’s time for the government to act.

Dr. Lida Pet-Soede is a leader of the WWF’s Coral Triangle Global Initiative in Jakarta. She oversees a diverse team working in cooperation with the governments, private sector and coastal communities of Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, East Timor and the Solomon Islands.

Related Articles:

Hong Kong Airline Bans Shark Fin as Cargo

Carrefour Joins Shark Fin Boycott in Singapore

Shark fin goes off the menu at Peninsula hotels

Shark lovers left high and dry

Shark fin soup disappearing from the menu at Chinese weddings


More Articles related ....

Australia rallies support for super-trawler vote

BBC News, 12 September 2012

The size of the super trawler has led to concerns of over-fishing

Australia's government is working to rally support for a bill preventing a super-trawler fishing in its waters, after the opposition spoke out against the move.

The bill, introduced on Tuesday, aims to stop the vessel from fishing for two years while more research is conducted.

Fishermen and environmental groups fear the Dutch-owned trawler will over-fish.

But Australia's fishing authority has dismissed these fears, saying the catch will be managed.

Its ''robust management of fisheries will ensure that any fishing is sustainable'', the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) said.

Environment Minister Tony Burke introduced the legislation in parliament on Tuesday and is now looking to independent MPs to support the vote, after the opposition called the law a ''Trojan horse''.

"It allows the minister to ban any fishing in Australia of any kind - recreational fishing, charter fishing, commercial fishing - on the basis of the minister deciding it has a 'social impact'," said opposition lawmaker Christopher Pyne.

'No evidence'

The 9,500-tonne, 143m Abel Tasman super-trawler - formerly named the FV Margiris - is currently docked at Port Lincoln in South Australia.

Activists and local fishermen have been protesting for months, citing concerns over over-fishing, by-fishing - whereby other marine life gets swept up in the net - and wider impact on the environment.

Given the ''uncertainties'' over the consequences for species such as dolphins and seabirds, Mr Burke said, he would take a cautious stand.

"If we get this wrong, there are risks to the environment, to commercial operators and to everyone who loves fishing and they are risks I am not prepared to take," he added.

Seafish Tasmania, the company that brought the boat to Australia, had planned to fish in waters from Western Australia to southern Queensland. It had obtained approval from AFMA for a quota of two types of fish.

The independent fishing authority has tried to allay fears, saying that it enforces stringent catch limits and strict regulations to ensure sustainability.

''AFMA has found no evidence that larger boats pose a higher risk to either commercial species or broader marine ecosystem when total catches are limited and the limits are enforced,'' said a statement on the AFMA website.

Despite this those opposed to the controversial trawler, which would be the biggest boat to fish in Australian waters, remain unconvinced and want more research done.

Activist groups want the Australian government to impose a ban on all super-trawlers.

"These ships literally vacuum up entire schools of fish. You could fly a jumbo jet through the opening of its net with room to spare," said Greenpeace Australia Pacific oceans campaigner Nathaniel Pelle in a statement.

However, AFMA maintains that the net used by the Abel Tasman is ''not at all the biggest net in the current Australian fishing fleet''.

It also added that the reason for the vessel's vast size is that it has a factory and freezer on board - two thirds of the trawler are for processing and storage.

Related Article:

Super-Trawler Cleared to Fish in Australian Waters

Antarctic molluscs 'switch sex'

BBC News, Ella Davies, Reporter, BBC Nature, 11 September 2012

Related Stories 

• 'Spineless' animals under threat
• Rare mussels almost 'wiped out'
• How a cone snail catches its prey

Antarctic bivalves have surprised scientists who have discovered that the animals switch sex.

The reproduction of Lissarca miliaris was studied in the 1970s and the species was first described in 1845.

But their hermaphrodite nature had remained unknown until they were studied by scientists from the National Oceanography Centre, Southampton.

Researchers suggest the molluscs could switch between the sexes to efficiently reproduce in the extremely cold ocean.

Antarctic wildlife

Watch carnivorous sea stars feasting

on a sea bed supper

Visit the coldest and windiest place

on Earth

Learn about molluscs: from giant squid

to tiny snails

The results are published in the journal Polar Biology.

"The previous reproductive study only looked at the large eggs and broods," said PhD student and lead author Adam Reed.

This earlier work showed how females brood their young for up to 18 months, from "large yolky eggs" to "fully shelled young", and found that females can support as many as 70 young inside their hinged shell.

But concentrating on reproduction at a cellular level, Mr Reed and colleagues discovered that the eggs were actually present in males.

"Curiously, we found huge numbers of very small eggs in functional males, which appear to be far higher in number than an individual could brood throughout the life of the animal," he told BBC Nature.

The team suggested that the bivalves reproduce as males while they are still in the "small" stages of development, switching to female organs once they are large enough to brood a significant number of eggs. 

Lissarca miliaris young develop
inside the shell

"At present the traits we describe are unusual for Antarctic bivalves, but in 10 years perhaps this will be common too," said Mr Reed.

"Hermaphroditism is not necessarily uncommon in Antarctic bivalves, and with many species still to study there may be many more to describe."

Brooding meanwhile is a relatively common reproductive trait in Antarctic invertebrates and has been linked to the extreme conditions.

"Brooding is common for small bivalves and has been discussed for many years in Antarctic biology," said Mr Reed.

"Large yolky eggs that are brooded have much lower mortality than small planktonic larvae, but fewer are produced."

He explained that in extremely cold environments, development is slowed down so feeding larvae becomes a more exhaustive task.

"Brooding reduces the need for long periods of feeding", according to Mr Reed, making it a more efficient strategy for many Antarctic invertebrates including bivalves and echinoids. 

The name bivalve comes from the Latin
for  'two doors' or 'shutters', referring to
the familiar hinged shell

The researcher suggested that the bivalves may be further maximising their efficiency when it comes to reproduction.

"We also found that after males become female, the male reproductive tissue persists for a long time," he said.

But for now, the bivalves can maintain their mystery because scientists are restricted to studying them during the months that staff are based at the British Antarctic Survey's remote research station.

"Perhaps they may alternate their sex so they can continue to reproduce as males while brooding their young for 18 months?" Mr Reed theorised.

"The study highlights how much we do not know about some of the common invertebrates living in the Antarctic, and how much research there is still to do."

Related Articles:

Antarctica Researchers Seek Life in Lake 2 Miles Under Ice

Drilling Discovers Ancient Antarctic Rainforest

"Around the Horn" - (a message from Kryon channeled by Lee Carroll)

“… Now, in the process of all of this, there's going to be renewed interest in Antarctica, and you're going to find some interesting things about the land under the ice. The topography of the land under the ice does not match the topography of the ice above. Some astonishing shapes will be revealed when you map the actual land under the ice. Points of mountains are going to be revealed, giving an entire different idea of what Antarctica might have been and what its purpose really is. The continent that is uninhabitable by Human Beings may very well be the engine of life for Human Beings. And I will leave it at that. …”

Shell criticised for limited testing of Alaska drilling containment equipment

Greenpeace says oil company used 'stock-car race' recklessless in testing capping stack to prevent Gulf of Mexico-style blowout

guardian.co.uk, Terry Macalister, Sunday 9 September 2012

Offshore oil and gas production in the Cook Inlet oilfield of Alaska. Shell have
been criticised by Greenpeace and US group Peer for limited testing of equipment
to stop a Gulf of Mexico-style disaster. Photograph: PA Lawrence, LLC/Alamy

Shell has been accused of "stock-car racing recklessness" after apparently undertaking only the most limited testing of a key piece of equipment aimed at preventing a Gulf of Mexico-style blowout during its controversial drilling in the Arctic.

Documents obtained under a Freedom of Information Act request suggest field-testing of a containment dome took place over two hours on 25 and 26 June. The dome, known as a "capping stack", would be dropped over any stricken wellhead.

Two officials from the bureau of safety and environmental enforcement (BSSE) – an arm of the US interior department – were present with Shell officials at the tests in Puget Sound, Alaska, but there was no independent verification of the tests.

Shell reportedly started work yesterday on the $4.5bn (£2.8bn) drilling programme in the Chukchi Sea, 70 miles off Alaska's north-west coast. It does not yet have permission to drill into oil reserves.

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (Peer), a US group that helps federal and state employees raise the alarm on environmental protection issues, said it was shocked by the single page of notes from the government agency after it filed a federal lawsuit against the BSSE asking for all documents relating to the capping tests.

This "slim production" belied the agency's [BSSE] claim in press statements that it had conducted comprehensive testing to meet "rigorous new standards", added Peer. "The first test merely showed that Shell could dangle its cap in 200ft of water without dropping it," said Kathryn Douglass, a Peer staff lawyer. "The second test showed the capping system could hold up under laboratory conditions for up to 15 minutes without crumbling. Neither result should give the American public much comfort."

Shell did not contest the assumptions made by Peer about the testing but said the containment cap was only one of various pieces of equipment assembled over a long period of time to deal with any emergency.

"Approval of our Chukchi Sea oil spill response plan [Orsp] … validates the huge amount of time, technology, and resources we have dedicated to assembling an Arctic oil spill response fleet second to none in the world," said a Shell spokesman.

"It reinforces that Shell's approach to Arctic exploration is aligned with the high standards the department of interior expects from an offshore leader. Specifically, Shell's Orsp includes the assembly of a 24/7 onsite, nearshore and onshore Arctic-class oil spill response fleet, collaboration with the US Coast Guard to test roles and responsibilities and newly engineered Arctic capping and containment systems." Environmental campaigners Greenpeace said the limited testing of the crucial sub-sea cap displayed a "total disregard" for even the most basic safety standards.

"Such recklessness wouldn't look out of place in a stock-car race," said Ben Ayliffe, senior Arctic campaigner at Greenpeace. "The only option now is for the US government to call a halt to Shell's plans to open up the frozen north because the company is so clearly unable to operate safely in the planet's most extreme environment.

"Whatever Shell is able to do in the narrow window between now and when the sea ice returns, it won't erase the clear evidence we've seen in the past two months that there's no such thing as safe drilling in the Arctic."

The company was granted permission to starting digging with its drill ship in the Chukchi Sea but only into the layer of ocean bottom located above oil reserves.

Shell can dig 20-by-40ft mud-line cellars, which will eventually hold and protect a well's blowout preventer 40ft below the seabed. The US interior secretary, Ken Salazar, said he had made his decision after an exhaustive review of Shell drilling rigs and safety equipment, including a capping stack.

"Any approved activities will be held to highest safety, environmental protection and emergency response standards," he said.

Shell hopes to drill exploratory wells in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas in this year's open-water season, rapidly drawing to a close.

Related Articles:

Shell postpones plans to start Arctic drilling until next year

Shell Halts Chukchi Sea Drilling

Deepwater Horizon: BP accused of gross negligence

Antarctica Researchers Seek Life in Lake 2 Miles Under Ice

Jakarta Globe, September 07, 2012

Picture of tiny shrimp-like creature 600 feet under Antarctic ice.
(Photo courtesy NASA/AP) 

  

Related articles

• Australian Plane Makes Rare Landing on Antarctica Ice Runway
• A Green Antarctica? Leaf Remains Point to a Lusher Continent
• Scientists Close to Subglacial Lake
• New Zealand Searches for Would-Be Antarctic Explorer
• British Skier Conquers Antarctica

British researchers are preparing to drill through 3 kilometers of Antarctic ice to search for life in samples from a lake that’s been isolated from the outside world for hundreds of thousands of years.    

A year after delivering 70 tons of equipment to the site of Lake Ellsworth, a body of fresh water between the West Antarctic ice sheet and the bedrock under the southern continent, scientists next month will deliver another 26 tons of gear, the British Antarctic Survey said today in an e-mailed statement. In December they plan to drill for 100 hours to reach the lake.    

The UK effort follows a Russian project that in February drilled to Lake Vostok, more than 3.7 kilometers under the Antarctic ice. The teams are searching for signs of life in water that remains liquid due to a combination of the pressure of thousands of meters of ice and geothermal heat from below.    

“For years we have speculated that new forms of microbial life could have evolved in the unique habitats of Antarctica’s sub-glacial lakes,” John Parnell, a professor of geology at the University of Aberdeen, said in the statement. “If life can withstand even the deepest, darkest and most isolated conditions for more than a million years, then it has the ability to exist anywhere - and by that I mean not just on Earth.”     The British team will employ a drilling technique using hot water to create the borehole 36 centimeters (14 inches) wide, according to the statement. After 100 hours of drilling, the scientists will have just a day to recover samples before the borehole refreezes, sealing the lake again.                         

Finding Life    

“We are standing at the threshold of making new discoveries about a part of our planet that has never been explored in this way,” Martin Siegert, the project’s principle investigator and a researcher at the University of Bristol, said in the statement. “Finding life in a lake that could have been isolated for up to half a million years is an exciting prospect.”    

To ensure the samples aren’t contaminated by material from the surface, they’ll be collected using equipment that meets the same standards as equipment designed for space exploration.    

A Russian team on Feb. 5 penetrated more than 3.7 kilometers of ice to reach the waters of Lake Vostok, another body of water underneath Antarctica, where they collected samples of “fresh frozen” water, according to the country’s Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute.    

Lakes exist deep below the Antarctic surface because the pressure exerted by thousands of meters of ice drives down the freezing point of water. Lake Ellsworth is one of 387 known subglacial Antarctic lakes.

Bloomberg

Related Articles:

Drilling Discovers Ancient Antarctic Rainforest

"Around the Horn" - (a message from Kryon channeled by Lee Carroll)

“… Now, in the process of all of this, there's going to be renewed interest in Antarctica, and you're going to find some interesting things about the land under the ice. The topography of the land under the ice does not match the topography of the ice above. Some astonishing shapes will be revealed when you map the actual land under the ice. Points of mountains are going to be revealed, giving an entire different idea of what Antarctica might have been and what its purpose really is. The continent that is uninhabitable by Human Beings may very well be the engine of life for Human Beings. And I will leave it at that. …”

Hong Kong Airline Bans Shark Fin as Cargo

The New York Times, Mark MCDonald, September 5, 2012

Workers in Hong Kong preparing shark fins for shipping. Cathay Pacific says it
 will stop carrying shark fin on its cargo flights. (Andrew Ross/Agence France-
 Presse — Getty Images)

HONG KONG — Cathay Pacific, responding to pressure from an array of environmental groups in Asia, has announced that it will no longer carry shark fin on its cargo flights.

The Hong Kong-based carrier, one of the world’s largest cargo airlines, said in a statement that it would “stop shipping unsustainably sourced sharks and shark-related products.”

Dozens of marine-protection campaign organizations had sent a joint petition to Cathay Pacific seeking the cargo ban. They cited Hong Kong government figures that showed 10,500 tons of shark fin were imported into the territory last year, with Cathay alone handling as much as 650 tons. The airline has said that the real figure was much lower.

A Cathay spokeswoman, Elin Wong, told Rendezvous on Wednesday that the cargo ban “will not have a material impact on our business.”

“We did this,” she said, “because we now have compelling evidence that the majority of shark fishing is incompatible with our position on sustainable development.”

A statement from the airline cited “the vulnerable nature of sharks, their rapidly declining population, and the impacts of overfishing for their parts and products.”

“This is a milestone in our efforts to end the trade of products like shark fin in Hong Kong,” said Ran Elfassy, director of Shark Rescue, a marine conservation campaign in Hong Kong. “The city is the leading trade hub for these endangered animal products, and airlines are significant players in the supply chain.”

Another environmental campaigner in Hong Kong, Alex Hofford, said Wednesday that Cathay’s decision was “very heartening for everyone in the conservation community — and the greater population at large.”

Hong Kong is the Asian hub for the trade in shark fins, serving as the principal transit point for fish and seafood products headed to markets in mainland China. Shark fin soup, which is essentially tasteless, is still seen as a status symbol in China, Hong Kong and ethnic Chinese communities. It remains a staple at corporate events and wedding banquets, even for those of modest means.

“Rapid economic growth across Asia in recent years has catapulted millions into the ranks of those who can now afford the dish,” my colleague Bettina Wassener reported in July.

Six weeks ago, China said it would ban shark fin soup at official banquets, although it could take up to three years for the ban to be fully implemented. The ban was reported by Xinhua, the state-run news agency.

A handful of luxury hotels and hotel chains have taken shark fin soup off their menus, including the Shangri-La and Peninsula hotels here in Hong Kong. The Berjaya chain of luxury hotels and resorts also no longer serves the soup at its 18 hotels worldwide, including six properties in Malaysia and hotels in London, Manila and Singapore.

Several American states have criminalized the sale, use or possession of shark fin, but those bans remain scattered. As Rendezvous reported this summer, DNA samples from soup served in restaurants in 14 American cities showed that some were even using fins from scalloped hammerhead sharks, an endangered species on the Red List of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.

Some ethnic Chinese residents in Calgary, Alberta, have objected to their city’s recent ban on shark fin soup. The Calgary Herald, in a story on Tuesday about the issue, said the soup was still available at some restaurants in the city, “though often as an off-the-menu item for $50 to $200 a bowl.”

“Shark finning — the practice of catching a shark, slicing off its fins and then discarding the body at sea — takes a tremendous toll on shark populations,” said the Pew Charitable Trusts. “Up to 73 million sharks are killed every year to primarily support the global shark fin industry, valued for the Asian delicacy shark fin soup.”

Others put the death toll higher: “We’re killing 100 million sharks a year for shark-fin soup,” said the marine conservationist and shark expert Richard Ellis. “It’s insane.”

A third of open-ocean sharks and rays are now threatened with extinction, primarily due to overfishing, according to the Shark Specialist Group at the I.U.C.N.

“Due to the vulnerable nature of sharks, their rapidly declining population, and the impact of overfishing for their parts and products, our carriage of these is inconsistent with our commitment to sustainable development,” Cathay Pacific said in a statement.

The company’s Web site says, “Cathay Pacific and Dragonair do not serve shark’s fin soup either inflight, at Cathay Pacific City, Dragonair House or at any corporate events or meals which are organised or subsidised by the company.” (The new cargo ban also extends to flights on Dragonair, a Cathay subsidiary.)

Related Articles:

Carrefour Joins Shark Fin Boycott in Singapore

Shark fin goes off the menu at Peninsula hotels

Shark lovers left high and dry

Shark fin soup disappearing from the menu at Chinese weddings


More Articles related ....

Deepwater Horizon: BP accused of gross negligence

BBC News, 5 September 2012 

US Oil Spill 

• Louisiana ruin remains
• Counting the cost
• Eco-impact still unclear
• Timeline: BP oil spill

The disaster was the worst US
offshore oil spill

The US Justice Department has accused BP of "gross negligence and wilful misconduct" over the Deepwater Horizon disaster, claims which BP deny.

The allegations came in papers filed in the federal court in New Orleans.

The Deepwater Horizon rig had been leased by BP. It exploded on 20 April 2010, killing 11 workers and spilling millions of gallons of crude oil.

If the government can prove gross negligence it can triple the damages BP may have to pay to $21bn (£13bn).

The case is due to go to trial in New Orleans in January 2013, although talks are underway between BP and the US government to try to settle the claims.

"The behaviour, words, and actions of these BP executives would not be tolerated in a middling size company manufacturing dry goods for sale in a suburban mall," the government said in its 39-page filing.

BP has denied the claims. "BP believes it was not grossly negligent and looks forward to presenting evidence on this issue at trial in January," the company said in a statement.

Transocean, the Swiss-based company that owned the rig, declined to comment, the Reuters news agency said.

The legal filing said that errors made by BP and Transocean in deciphering a pressure test on the well supported the government's case.

"That such a simple, yet fundamental and safety-critical test could have been so stunningly, blindingly botched in so many ways, by so many people, demonstrates gross negligence," it said.

Related Article:

BP suffers further blow as Hurricane Isaac dredges up more oil from Gulf of Mexico spill

Super-Trawler Cleared to Fish in Australian Waters

Jakarta Globe, September 04, 2012

This handout file photograph taken on August 30, 2012 and provided by Greenpeace
 shows activists on an inflatable boat (below) intercepting the world's second largest
 factory fishing trawler, the FV Margiris, blocking the monster ships attempt to enter
 Port Lincoln in South Australia on August 30, 2012. A huge Dutch super-trawler was
 on September 4, 2012 given the go-ahead to fish in Australian waters but with tough
conditions to minimize by-catch such as dolphins, seals and sea lions. (AFP Photo)

               

Related articles

• A Community Struggles With Jakarta’s Water Quality
• Climate Change Driving Australian Fish South: Report
• Australia Urges Deeper US-China Ties
• Australian Trafficker’s Mother Begs Malaysia for Mercy
• Australian Man Severely Burned in Firework Accident

A huge Dutch super-trawler was Tuesday given the go-ahead to fish in Australian waters but with tough conditions to minimize by-catch such as dolphins, seals and sea lions.

The 9,500-ton FV Margiris repelled Greenpeace protesters to dock at Port Lincoln in South Australia last Thursday for re-flagging as an Australian vessel before its proposed deployment to Tasmania for bait-fishing.

Environment Minister Tony Burke sought legal advice about whether he could intervene over concerns that dolphins and other marine life would inadvertently get swept up in its huge nets.

But he said he had been told he does not have the power to block it fishing in Australian waters.

“Under national environmental law I don’t have the power to block it altogether,” he told ABC television, but said the trawler’s operators would have to prove they were doing everything necessary to minimize by-catch.

“What I do have is the legal power to impose a number of restrictions on it based on the impact it can have, not on the fish that it’s targeting, but on the by-catch — the seals, the dolphins, the fish that are protected and listed and I have responsibility for,” Burke said.

“The big vessel will have to fish within the rules so that the impact it has on the environment is no more than if it was fishing on a small vessel,” he added.

Under conditions imposed by the government, fishing will have to be suspended if a dolphin dies in the ship’s nets or if three or more seals perish. It will also be banned from sea lion hunting grounds.

The trawler will also be required to have an observer on board and to record its activities on an underwater camera.

The 143-meter (469-foot) Margiris sparked protests among conservation groups and local fishermen when it was announced earlier this year that it would fish off Tasmania.

The Tasmanian businessman behind the Margiris venture said the restrictions were acceptable, and workable.

“I think what he’s suggesting sounds reasonable, and we’ll certainly study those conditions very closely,” Seafish Tasmania director Gerry Geen told the broadcaster.

“But on the face of it I think that they’re the sort of measures that will help us to reduce by-catch down to a very low level and we’ll be very pleased to go along with them.”

The Australian Fisheries Management Authority has dismissed concerns about over-fishing, saying the trawler would be allowed to catch just 10 percent of available fish and would have little if any impact on the broader eco-system.

Agence France-Presse

Anstruther in Fife sees mass stranding of pilot whales

BBC News, 2 September 2012

More than 20 whales are believed to have died after becoming stranded

Animal rescue experts have been called to a mass stranding of whales on the coast of Fife.

More than 20 whales are thought to have died out of an estimated 30 that were stranded.

The coastguard said nine whales were being kept alive by vets from British Divers and Marine Life Rescue, with help from the emergency services.

The incident between Anstruther and Pittenweem involves pilot whales, each of them approximately 20ft (6m) long.

Forth coastguard were alerted to the incident at about 07:00 BST on Sunday.

Three of the stranded whales are believed to be young pups.

It is hoped four of the surviving mammals will be refloated at high tide on Sunday.

A large number of bystanders gathered at the scene, and the coastguard urged the public to stay away to allow rescue teams to carry out their duties.

Coastguard teams from St Andrews and Leven, Anstruther lifeboat, and Fife Police are assisting with the incident.

Related Articles:

16 pilot whales die in Scottish cove

5 Beached Whales Doing Better At Florida Center

Russian Navy UFO records say aliens love oceans

RT.com, 21 July, 2009 (Edited: 17 February, 2010)

The Russian navy has declassified its records of encounters with unidentified objects technologically surpassing anything humanity ever built, reports Svobodnaya Pressa news website.

The records dating back to soviet times were compiled by a special navy group collecting reports of unexplained incidents delivered by submarines and military ships. The group was headed by deputy Navy commander Admiral Nikolay Smirnov, and the documents reveal numerous cases of possible UFO encounters, the website says.

Vladimir Azhazha, former navy officer and a famous Russian UFO researcher, says the materials are of great value.

“Fifty percent of UFO encounters are connected with oceans. Fifteen more – with lakes. So UFOs tend to stick to the water,” he said.

On one occasion a nuclear submarine, which was on a combat mission in the Pacific Ocean, detected six unknown objects. After the crew failed to leave behind their pursuers by maneuvering, the captain ordered to surface. The objects followed suit, took to the air, and flew away.

Many mysterious events happened in the region of Bermuda Triangle, recalls retired submarine commander Rear Admiral Yury Beketov. Instruments malfunctioned with no apparent reason or detected strong interference. The former navy officer says this could be deliberate disruption by UFOs.

Vladimir Kremlev for RT. 

“On several occasions the instruments gave reading of material objects moving at incredible speed. Calculations showed speeds of about 230 knots, of 400 kph. Speeding so fast is a challenge even on the surface. But water resistance is much higher. It was like the objects defied the laws of physics. There’s only one explanation: the creatures who built them far surpass us in development,” Beketov said.

Navy intelligence veteran, Captain 1st rank Igor Barklay comments:

“Ocean UFOs often show up wherever our or NATO’s fleets concentrate. Near Bahamas, Bermudas, Puerto Rico. They are most often seen in the deepest part of the Atlantic Ocean, in the southern part of the Bermuda Triangle, and also in the Caribbean Sea.”

Another place where people often report UFO encounters is Russia’s Lake Baikal, the deepest fresh water body in the world. Fishermen tell of powerful lights coming from the deep and objects flying up from the water.

In one case in 1982 a group of military divers training at Baikal spotted a group of humanoid creatures dressed in silvery suits. The encounter happened at a depth of 50 meters, and the divers tried to catch the strangers. Three of the seven men died, while four others were severely injured.

“I think about underwater bases and say: why not? Nothing should be discarded,” says Vladimir Azhazha. “Skepticism is the easiest way: believe nothing, do nothing. People rarely visit great depths. So it’s very important to analyze what they encounter there.”

Meanwhile Russian Navy officials have denied the collection of UFO-related encounters exists. A source in the Navy’s service staff said the story may have its roots in the reports of vessel commanders, which describe locating objects of unclear but Earthly origin.

“An illusion of a UFO encounter can result from large fish shoals, floating garbage or natural phenomena,” ITAR-TASS news agency cites the source.

Read also UFO phenomenon was strictly tabooed in USSR

Related Article:

Neil Armstrong, first man on the moon, dies aged 82