From: sasealion@wam.co.za
Date: August 24, 2006
Sanlam SA's largest Life Insurer sponsors WWF Shark feeding which leads to Attacks on humans
Dear All Seal
Supporters,
I implore you to please consider the
importance of what I place now before you. When people start to get
increasingly bitten and eaten by sharks and still logic does not
prevail. You know things have gone too far. This can be addressed
right now and stopped - but I need each of you to understand it and
then act upon it.
If there was a logical explanation
for this decades old perpetual cruelty, perhaps I might understand
it. If it was to protect seabirds or keep seal numbers down - why
not then just restrict them to a few proper larger islands -
instead of these awash rocks. All told there is no explanation. If
you know of another species, that is free wildlife, protected
nationally and internationally, where millions has cruelly died
subjected to this 'unnatural' cruelty, by a government policy, that
has never admitted it, but instead claims it is natural - then
please ignore this appeal. If not then you should act - as
they are voiceless.
It took a few days and many
phone calls but finally. In the interests of all, the Argus
Newspaper today printed the above story. (see attached letter of
this story)
Dr John Little of WWF-SA admitted
yesterday in an hour long phone call with myself, that WWF through
a scientific research by the Witwatersrand University did a study
which lead to the policy of legalising the permitting and feeding
of white sharks for the cage diving industry in South Africa. When
I asked Dr Little why his head of Marine Conservation, Dr Deon Nel
ran away from me and refused to be interviewed by me for a
one-minute slot on a 50/50 Wildlife program. He replied, "the
film-crew had high-jacked WWF and that Seal Alert-SA was seen as a
competitor, and that with (800 million annual) funding have
insufficient funding or experts on seals".
I would write to Sanlam Life Insurers who
sponsor WWF-SA's Marine Conservation Programs
http://www.wwf.org.za/marine.htmand
ask them how they can be a
party to this cruelty or members of the public being now attacked
and eaten alive - http://www.sanlam.co.za/eng/contactus/contactdetails/contact+details.htm
and http://www.sanlam.co.za/eng/directors/directors.htm.
Try to get an official policy letter -
Does Sanlam support the chumming, baiting and feeding of white
sharks which could be the cause behind members of the public
getting increasingly attacked and eaten alive in the Cape? Do they
support the restricting of seals to small awash offshore rocks,
which causes their extinction, mass annual drowning and are victims
of spectacular white shark aerial predations? Do they support the
intentional destruction of the Cape fur seals? Are they
willing to accept liability if it can be proven that white shark
feeding leads to attacks on bathers - so that 11 shark cage diving
operators can make some money?
When international Wildlife Conservation
organizations start advising the public that to go deeper
than waist-height in the sea is an extreme sport and advise
all sea users to be safe, purchase electronic shielding
devices at R2500 a pop - then you know things are out of
control. http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=137&fArticleId=3404284.
What we have in the making will make Peter Benchley's JAWS look
like childs play.
It helps little to end the Namibian Baby
Seal Cull - if in the end the Seals still have nowhere to go or
cannot return to their islands. Hence the importance. The below
info I have sent out before, but nobody reacted or did anything. I
have also taken the time to re-write it very simply and clearly.
The more you respond - the more reactions we are likely to get. It
would be great if the media could expose this, either locally or
overseas - so pick up your phones and ask them.
Put a single hour aside for this, make the
calls and write the emails, you will be amazed at how effective you
can be.
Remember, opening up the islands in South
Africa will give the Namibian mainland seals being illegally culled
a safe place to escape to - which in the end will end sealing in
Namibia.
PS - Dont forget to sign the http://www.petitiononline.com/STASH06/petition.html and
to send your $1 to Seal Alert-SA, Box 221, Hout Bay, South Africa,
7806.
Nationally Sponsored Extreme Seal
Cruelty
In 1971 - there was
80 495 Cape fur seal pups born on offshore islands over 4000 km in
southern Africa. 26 years later. In 1997 - there was 72 240 seal
pups being born. Every year over 80 000 seals perished, mostly baby
seals. Here is why.
In South Africa - nature wanted the seals to
live and bred on offshore islands. Proper large and safe islands
for breeding. Smaller islands or rocks to be used for resting
during migration on foraging fishing trips. These islands are still
there uninhabited and even protected. The islands and the seal
populations upon them should be 4% east coast, 85% west coast, 11%
Namibia. Ignore Namibia and its mainland sealing issue for
now. Lets just focus on east and west coast of South Africa. The
reason its where 89% of the islands are situated.
East coast : Seals should be naturally
breeding on 44 ha or 11 islands. Instead they have been restricted
to 5 islands or 8 ha. Below is what this physically
means.
The red circle in the top left is the
rock seals are restricted to, the other two are banned and extinct
-
on the right pic, a 20ha island and a 3 ha island separated by a
narrow channel
In the above two east coast examples. I
ask you to please imagine you are a seal. The pic on the left, in
1971 had 1702 pups born there (red circle), 30 years of suffering,
where every year pups born there were washed away and drowned, in
1997 there were only 142 pups born. A 92% decline. Extinction has
currently occurred. The 1702 female cow seals would have wanted to
have their pups on the bigger safer larger islands in the pics, but
conservation officials stationed on the island - bans, chases or
shoots any seal attempting to do so. Every year since 1971, these
seals would have tried, and were prevented.
There is not a single scientific paper stating
why this should have become a national policy.
The pic on the right. Seals are restricted
to the smaller 3 ha rock. Banned from other surrounding islands.
This colony has grown from 2679 in 1971, to 11 184 in 1997. The pic
below is this island. The growth in not from within the colony, but
seals continuously being banned from other colonies. Seals are not
allowed to swim across the channel to the 20 ha island. Any seal
attempting to do so is chased away or shot. Historically his 20 ha
Island called Dyer, was named after a sealer who killed over 25 000
seals in one year in 1725. Today it is banned to
seals.
Above pic, is the type of habitat
these cows are expected to give birth to their pups who cant swim
or are waterproofed for 6 weeks from birth. 90% of the pups are
born in December.
These unnaturally forced breeding colonies rise no more than 4 m
above sea-level. Strong gale force winds blow on-shore and waves of
5 m, like in the pic above pound and completely submerge these
breeding colonies - hour after hour for weeks on end. Can anything
survive in these conditions, let alone a new born baby seal who
cant swim? This is what it means to be a protected CITES appendix
II seal in South Africa.
3 of these 5 island seal colonies since 1991 have
become internationally famous for white shark cage diving. Where
thousands of tourists, pay up to a R1000 a trip to experience an
encounter with a white shark. The thrill of seeing these shark
breech the water as they hunt 'naturally' the seals thrills all.
All believing this is just one big natural spectacular marine
event. The sharks are there because of the annual washing and
drowning of this easy constant supply of seal meat.
The bay in the pic below is known as False Bay. The
small circle is the Seal Island 2 ha. The big red circle is
Robben (seal) island, 250-times larger, 576 ha. Along the beach and
to the left of (small red circle), since 2000, at least two
people have been eaten alive, at least two have lost their legs,
young surfing children and many others attacked, the last a young
life saver directly opposite the seal colony - lost his leg. Over
half a million baby seals have either drowned, washed ashore or
been eaten by sharks in the past 30 years. 100 years ago there were
no seals on Seal Island in False Bay,it was a seabird
island.
False Bay
Robben (Seal) Island above and below (the
big red circle), is less than 150 km easy seal swim distance away -
a daily seals swim distance. This is the type of islands these pups
should be born on. Instead it has been extinct for over 200 years.
Banned to these rocks where the cage diving activity now takes
place. If all the seals in South Africa and Namibia were allowed to
re-colonise just this one island - Robben. They would occupy all of
them 6% or if only along the seashore 21% of this islands
coastline.
The same gale force winds that prevail at 40-60
km in December, which create on-shore massive waves and storm
conditions - blow offshore on the west coast. On the west coast,
these winds, flatten the sea like glass, and 85% of the islands lie
off the west coast within 200 km of each other. 14 islands of in
total 934 ha. 11 of the largest is banned and extinct to seals. 3
ha is all seals have, see conditions below.
On the left, 576 ha Robben (seal)
island extinct - On the right 0.1 ha Paternoster Rocks (a thousand
times smaller)
In June, when pups are 6 months, the revise
happens, the west coast becomes known as the 'Cape of Storms' where
winds blow onshore with massive waves. Can you just imagine what it
must be like trying to live, rest and stay dry on the small rock in
winter. With waves metres high pounding this area, covering it in
white water constantly, every minute of every hour for weeks on
end.
These are the total conditions, no exceptions -
authorities and conservationists expect our protected seals to have
lived under since 1940. The only alternative for a Cape fur seal -
is the mainland sealing colonies.
Do you all clearly now understand how unnatural this
all is? If seals were just allowed on the Unesco World Heritage
Site - Robben (seal) Island, it would save 100 000 seals from
suffering and dying in the most terrible of ways. Instead South
Africa says its natural and everybody believes them.
Do you further understand, that there is absolutely
not a single scientific or conservation reason -why seals should be
banned from these islands and restricted to just 2%. If they
weren't and things were natural - do you also understand there
would be no white shark cage diving, no chumming, baiting and
feeding of sharks around these restricted rock seal colonies?
Do you also realise that possibly, nobody would have then
been eaten in False Bay, lost limbs or been attacked by sharks. The
worst is still to come regarding attacks on humans.
Do you know, who is behind seals being banned from these
proper former breeding islands - WWF, and do you know it was WWF,
who convinced South African government to legalise white shark cage
diving and permit shark chumming and feeding. Do you also know
Sanlam Life Insurer, one of South Africa's largest life insurers is
WWF biggest marine financial contributors?
I have sent the below before, but hopefully in context it will make
more sense now. Is this the kind of Marine Conservation Sanlam has
sponsored via WWF?
Attaching the email below again. Write to Sanlam their details are
at the top of this email.
Spot the Criminal 'Feeding' Offence in
South Africa ?
Whilst members of the public
continued to be attacked by white sharks who eat people or their
limbs - City Shark Group has been working for over a year on the
solution.
Scientist at Marine and
Coastal Management, Dr Herman Oosthuizen of the Department of
Environmental Affairs and Tourism - "White shark cage diving is
basically that you can guarantee sightings of white sharks and for
the operators to be able to do that they have to chum and bait
otherwise they will not be able to guarantee sightings of white
sharks and there will be no white shark cage diving
industry".
In 2001, white shark cage
diving operators were made to sign a "code of
conduct";
◦
Should the permit holder not perform during the period for
which this permit is valid, fails to make any attempt to utilize
the permit to attract white sharks can result in this permit
being withdrawn.
◦ This permit authorises the permit holder to attract white sharks
by means of chumming and baiting.
◦ The permit holder shall use only natural fish. The bait shall not
exceed 25 kg per day. No mammals (including seals, whales or
dolphins may be used as bait).
◦ Artificial lures to attract white sharks is not
allowed.
In 2000, whilst the seal population
was experiencing its 5th mass die-off from starvation, where
between one third and one half of the seals were washing ashore.
Marine and Coastal Management introduced a regulation which now
made it a Criminal Offence to feed a seal. The next day, thousands
of seal pups started washing ashore in False Bay, an area where at
least two people since have been eaten by white sharks and at least
two more have lost limbs and many
more attacked.
In 2003, Francois Hugo of
Seal Alert-SA was arrested and criminally charged for
"tube-feeding" a seal pup he had rescued several months
earlier.
Officials were in out-cry that seals
needing rescue were being fed. This is some of their
comments;
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism's policy on wild
animals. In 2003 Deputy Director of MCM Horst Kleinscmidt
wrote - "Seals are wild animals, like lions, baboons or leopards.
We believe they should be treated accordingly. We do not allow
feeding of baboons at Cape Point or animals in the Kruger Park.
Feeding of wild animals is detrimental in any environment. It
creates dependency, distorts their natural behaviour and generally
leads to aggression towards humans".
In 2000, Managing Director of Two
Oceans Aquarium EA Fearnhead wrote, "the continuing reports of wild
fur seals being hand-fed is of considerable concern. It is
well-known and documented that regardless of the animal species
involved in such incidents, the end results are usually the same:
the animal either becomes dependent on being fed or expects to be
fed. If such feeding doesn't happen the animal will often "attack"
approaching humans ... the SPCA has my full support, and I know
they will also have that of the professional conservation bodies,
to have this feeding of seals stopped as soon as possible".
Dr Jeremy David and former Specialist Scientist,
head of Marine Mammal research at MCM wrote,"feeding wild animals
is a thoroughly bad practice. It's like feeding baboons. The seals
become semi-tame and there is every chance they will become
aggressive". In 1999, Mike Meyer of MCM wrote, "you just
don't feed wild animals. They lose their fear of man". Dr
Hamish Currie once described by MCM's as their seal rehabilitation
expert, wrote in 2000, "Anyone who feeds seals in a harbour has
rocks in his head".
The latest victim a False Bay Life Saver lost
his leg to a white shark directly opposite the seal colony in False
Bay.
For the Seals
Francois Hugo Seal Alert-SA
021-790 8774