jennifermarohasy.com/blog - The Politics and Environment Blog

Main menu:

Subscribe

September 2006
M T W T F S S
« Aug   Oct »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Tags

Archives

Authors

Site search

Please visit

Categories

Nature Photographs

Links

Disclaimer: The inclusion of a blog or website in this list should not be taken as an endorsement of its contents by me.

George McCallum

George McCallum is a regular reader and sometimes commentator at this blog. He has been based in Berlin for the last 9 years, working as a freelance wildlife photographer, marine mammal observer, freelance field researcher, chief cook and bottle washer. He also runs his own one man company, Whalephoto.

geoinzodiac.jpg

George has just returned from the Arctic and is working on the 20,000 or so digital images he has shot this year as well as preparing a poster/paper for the upcoming European Cetacean Society conference in San Sebastian, Spain. The conference is in early 2007 and George will be speaking on the use of flash equipment in low light and backlit conditions.

And George has found time to send us information about himself for the people category at this blog:

“I’ve been an ID photographer/observer on Norway´s whale population surveys since 1995, team leader on same last year, team leader/ID photographer of whale observers on some ecosystem surveys also last two years, also in arctic Norway, North and North East Atlantic areas.

Previous and concurrent to this, I have worked as a field researcher volunteer/ID photographer from both commercial whale watching boats and hired vessels off Andenes in Arctic Norway between 1995-2000, occasionally as a guide on one of the whale watching boats. Also worked as a field researcher/volunteer/ID photographer with T.Simila´s killer whale project in Arctic Norway from 1993 onwards. I also spent a number of winter seasons in Tysfjord working with and for various TV and film crews who had come to Tysfjord to film the local killer whale population as either vessel driver, local expert and once or twice as the subject being a prat for the cameras.

birdonhead.jpg
Its a kittiwake on his head.

I’ve spent 6 months in the Canary islands off the north African coast as a research assistant on a boat studying Short-finned Pilot whales, basic ID work and collecting data on the effects of whale watching boats on the local Pilot whale population.

Prior to that, I studied in Scotland for 5-6 years at University as a mature student. I studying biology, but dropped out before my final year after a few field trips led me to the realization that the field researchers had most of the fun and aimed myself in that direction.

For the ten years before that, I worked as a marine mammal trainer (with dolphins, seals, sea lions, sea elephants, killer whales etc.) for around ten years in various marine parks and establishments throughout Europe.

I’ve also worked as a barman, driven a delivery truck, worked on a farm, trained Macaws, penguins and a herring gull (strange but true) as well as working in a commercial slaughterhouse for 6 months or so.

Other experience includes using pax arms (modified DNA sampling rifles used to take a plug of blubber from marine mammals) maintaining and operating high frequency sonar equipment, conning various sea vessels of various sizes, and trying to fix various bits of equipment in the field when it goes up the creek without a paddle.

I speak three languages fluently and get by in two others and I can stutter around in French.

Hobbies include hassling and being hassled by airport security/airline check-in folk whilst traveling with 25 kg or more of assorted photographic equipment and having a once fortnightly malt whisky tasting session in the best stocked Malt whisky bar in the world in Schoneberg. The bar has over 700 different malts so my journalist friends and I foresee a number of years further research before we can give a final opinion on which is best.

Best regards from sunny 28C Berlin.
George

PS. Have you seen this, Greenpeace taking a pasting again:

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/29C5599A-FCD8-4E30-9AD5-5497999ABA1B.html

and this:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/ABC6DFDA-9DE9-4EA8-A269-65EAAB628676.html.

Thanks George for sharing this information about yourself with us … and for the great images!

———————–
As a reader and/or commentator at this blog you may like to tell us something about yourself. Contributions encouraged please email to jennifermarohasy@jennifermarohasy.com. I’ve just also received some great photographs and information from Walter Starck which I will upload soon with a link to his paper from the recent AEF conference.

wb0845.jpg
More wildlife photographs at Whalephoto.com.

Advertisement

190 Responses to “George McCallum”

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] Show All

  1. Comment from: david@tokyo


    The good thing about Sea Shepherd it is a personality cult. Once Watson is dead it’ll collapse. Let’s hope that Watson puts his body where his mouth is and takes an explosive harpoon to show that he really is prepared to die to save a whale (as he has stated in the media). Ann, I’d be interested in reading the dirt thread. Should be a useful discussion to point SS loonies too the next time I come across one. Only if you have time to fish it out though :-)

  2. Comment from: Ann Novek


    David,
    The site seems closed down temporarily, but it was on the greenpeace forest guardians site, and just type in Paul Watson…

    Man is not worth all this band-width but he should be locked up in a maximal security institution and medicated with anti-psychotic injections…

    I’ll check later if I can get hold of the discussion…. remember as well that Watson somehow had tried to get hold of one sick crew members money( don’t recall the history right now). This had been a court case….

  3. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Pinxie,
    Softy speaking here… sorry ,not any commando…

    Re the incident with the Arctic Sunrise and the Nisshin Mahru.

    I have not watched the video, it would be useless in my case, no maritime expert and I think the video can be interpreted incorrectly depending on which position you support.

    Maybe only the captains know the whole truth.

    However, we know this much for sure.
    Both ships and captains had been involved in an exactly similar ramming incident some years ago,
    and Pixie, the verdict from Lloyd’s was that the Japanese captain was guilty.

    And Pinxie, why didn’t Japan launch the resolution we all expected, demanding that Greenpeace be banned from the IWC. Instead they took a watered down version.

    Regarding an Aussie friend who works with Shane Rattenbury, Greenpeace had such technical proof that it would be impossible to accuse the Arctic Sunrise for the ramming.

    This is what I have heard, maybe David has another version…

  4. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Apologies. Read:” According to…

  5. Comment from: Libby


    I found Arne one of the most experienced and cautious skippers I’ve worked with. That’s all I’m going to say about it.

  6. Comment from: david@tokyo


    Ultimately the Nisshin Maru didn’t suffer any loss of life, and having already won a vote in favour of resuming commercial whaling I can understand why they decided not to pursue matters with the ramming more assertively at the IWC. All it would have achieved in political terms would be to stir up even more emotions in anti-whaling nations, where Greenpeace are always regarded as “the good guys”. I don’t think that can be taken as an admission of guilt at all – they were mature about it basically.

    Of course, people need only review the videos to decide for themselves. To me it’s clear that the Greenpeace ship at least could have avoided the collision (even if they did have the right of way, which I’m no expert on) – there is no point in denying that, the video is clear.

    And again, why was the Nisshin Maru in the South Pacific? They are there to catch whales. Not to gain media attention by causing an incident. They’d love to be able to go about their business without anyone recognising them being there. On the other hand, we all know that getting media attention is the primary reason why Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd were there. Causing a collision is a great way of getting media attention, and then blaming the Japanese for it fits in with what anti-whaling supporters want to believe about the “illegal whalers in the Australian Antarctic and Southern Ocean whale sanctuaries”.

    Seriously, can you think of a single reason why the Nisshin Maru captain would want to ram a Greenpeace ship (ultimately resulting in a big dent on the Greenpeace ship’s nose, caused by the side of the extremely long Nisshin Maru vessel)?

    One might be against whaling, but I think even if I were myself I’d be able to admit that the skipper from the Greenpeace ship could have taken actions to avoid the collision.

  7. Comment from: Pinxi


    Guys I was stirring you over the ‘ramming’ incident (been debated to death already, let’s not get into it here) & SS, & in the context, the few entries short of a dictionary comment amused myself.

    David yes I acknowledge that the word terrorist has a broader meaning which would invalidate my recent (stir) point on SS above. However you first raised the term in the specific context of “people smashing airplanes in to buildings” (your words) and I responded to that context. But let’s put it to pasture, particularly as that word gets bandied around too much these days.

    No Anne I wasn’t excusing factory farming or eating animals on the basis of them being bred to be docile but it does factor into discussions about whaling because the concept of intelligence does rear its head. Perhaps you can clarify your position on whaling? ie (personally, not GP) which aspects of whaling do you disagree with and why?

    I’m curious that David feels for farmed domesticated animals and finds it a more humane proposition to eat whale (correct me if I’m wrong David). It’s possible to buy free-range meat. Is that humane enough? (Note that Australian beef gets to kick its heels up in big paddocks). Apparently you eat more fish now because it’s more humane (?). Are yuo sure that’s wild fish you’re eating? THey even grow fish in big cages at sea these days. And what of declining fish stocks (unsustainable yields), drops in some fish species and impacts of some fishing practices? How do you compare and make a more humane choice on that basis?

  8. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Hello Pixie,
    I don’t think that neither David or me have participated in the “ramming” thread , and a few new facts did pop up..

    OK, my very own and personal position on whaling.

    The long version.
    I grew up with the images of Norwegian and Faroe Island whaling and found it disgusting.. it was impossible for me to understand how you could kill such a big animal humanely. And I didn’t like what I saw and heard..

    Anyway, back then I wasn’t familiar with factory farming and when I compared them I found factory farming worse than whaling…

    I have always had a weak spot that animals should be as wild as free as possible…

    I worked as a wildlife rehabilitator and took care of all kinds of birds and small mammals..

    Well, our first rule was, ” all animals are equals, and feel the same pain and anxiety , be they smart or “dumb”.

    I have taken care of , yes crows! as well as endangered white tailed eagles, so this argument that whales shouldn’t be hunted just because they are more intelligent than other animals didn’t suit my ideology.

    So yes Pinxie, I have changed my position on whaling a bit.

    I wish killing methods should be even more improved, and I’m not glad to read that whalers believe they are good enough, and don’t want to spend more money on science of improving killing methods.

    Finally, I think a very limited hunt of minkes is acceptable if properly carried out.

    And I strongly oppose that new species should be added to the whale hunt.

  9. Comment from: George McC


    Pinxi,
    No Anne I wasn’t excusing factory farming or eating animals on the basis of them being bred to be docile but it does factor into discussions about whaling because the concept of intelligence does rear its head

    Yet again, I await your proof / cites of the intellegence of whales and domestic cattle etc. … I´m all ears ..

    It does not factor into the discussion at all unless you can demonstrate that whales are inherently more intellegent than domestic cattle, and even then, are you really suggesting that animals should be hunted or not based on their intelligence level?

    Novel concept … that cow is smarter than most – lets not eat her .. but that whale is as thick as two short planks .. BOOM …

    yeah right ..

  10. Comment from: George McC


    Anne,

    Thanks for your personal opinion – I for one appreciate it .. one question for you though, if it is scientificly shown that say Fin whales in the North Atlantic could sustain a “properly carried out” hunt, would you still oppose that hunt? if so, why?

  11. Comment from: George McC


    Crivens … my spelling is getting worse every day … I need to get some reading glasses I think – must make an appointment at the opticians today …

  12. Comment from: Ann Novek


    George, you still have a long way to go to be as bad as me re spelling…

    Well, this hypothetical question from you.

    According to Lars Walloe, legally he believes it may be difficult to start whaling of Finn whales as Norway has not reserved themselves against the moratorium for this species.

    And I can give you some inside information from Iceland.

    Some weeks ago they did want to start up commercial whaling of Finn whales. They did plan to hunt 40 Fin whales. However, the season must be closed now and nothing happened, so both Norway and Iceland seem to have a good reason why they don’t hunt Fin whales.

  13. Comment from: George McC


    Nicely avoided question anne ;O)

    the question was ..

    ” one question for you though, if it is scientificly shown that say Fin whales in the North Atlantic could sustain a “properly carried out” hunt, would you still oppose that hunt? if so, why? ”

    ;op

  14. Comment from: david@tokyo


    > However you first raised the term in the specific context of “people smashing airplanes in to buildings” (your words) and I responded to that context.

    Well, to be fair you did bring “terrorist bombers” into the discussion. Sounds like 9/11 to me, no? But hey, don’t get the wrong idea. I don’t think SS are any where near as bad as the 9/11 guys.

    But we SHOULD NOT be fooled into thinking that just because the 9/11 bombers were so extreme that SS’s terrorist activities are “mellow”. They are not. They are terrorist activities, just not as extreme.

    > But let’s put it to pasture, particularly as that word gets bandied around too much these days.

    Sure. You take the lead :-)

    > I’m curious that David feels for farmed domesticated animals and finds it a more humane proposition to eat whale (correct me if I’m wrong David).

    Yes, I think it’s more humane and ethical to eat whales than farmed animals. But I’m happy with either providing that the animal suffering is minimised as much as possible. That’s a fairly loose restriction, but it’s easy to see when something isn’t being done appropriately.

    > Are yuo sure that’s wild fish you’re eating?

    I noted elsewhere that I prefer free range fish to the stuff farmed in Australia.

    > And what of declining fish stocks (unsustainable yields), drops in some fish species and impacts of some fishing practices?

    They need to be managed better, to balance maximum productivity within the scope of conservative use.

    > How do you compare and make a more humane choice on that basis?

    Humane choices are about animal welfare, not about sustainability (an environmental concern)

  15. Comment from: david@tokyo


    > I strongly oppose that new species should be added to the whale hunt.

    Ann, I’d be happy to see less minke whales taken in exchange for catches of some of the larger cousins.

    Say, save 2 minke whale lives and sacrifice one humpback? Less animal suffering, same amount of meat (although I guess you might be taking this position based on the possibility that it would take more time for a humpback to be killed on average than a minke?)

  16. Comment from: david@tokyo


    Re the objection procedure:

    Japan also only has an objection to the SOS with regard to minkes, as I remember.

    Looking at the behavior of the IWC, we see how ridiculous this is. Obviously the objection back in 1994 was because everyone knew that the SC had set that safe catch limits could be set for the species, starting at levels of 2,000 a year. So of course Japan was going to object to a sanctuary that would deny them or anyone else the right to take any.

    But they didn’t object to it with regard to humpbacks. In hindsight, they should have. It’s not because minkes were known to be abundant that they really objected, it’s because a sanctuary is a prohibitive measure that denies IWC member nations the right to harvest abundant species. Minkes were the only one back in 1994, but today in 2006 the situation is changing rapidly, yet it’s “bad luck” to Japan because the IWC continues to fail to meet it’s dual purpose.

    So why should any nation not just lodge an objection to every decision that the IWC makes? This is the situation that the IWC is in, and it’s ridiculous really.

    I guess in practice once the moratorium is lifted there will possibly be 75% support to abolish the sanctuary as well, although perhaps not – anti-whaling nations are more likely to only agree to allow “exceptions” to the moratorium, rather than let the RMP set quotas unfettered.

  17. Comment from: Ann Novek


    George,
    Principally I don’t eat endangered IUCN-listed animal meat.

    Käre George I would promote reindeer meat trade.

  18. Comment from: Ann Novek


    And a question to you guys.

    According to Iceland’s IWC Commissioner, Iceland has no plans to continue its scientific hunt.

    Can you tell me what this really means?

    Why does Japan continue its scientific hunt and not Iceland?

  19. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Pixie,
    Don’t want to be nasty against Aussies, the same thing happens in Europe.

    But I have heard that your( and European) live transports of sheep to the Middle East is an extremely cruel practise.

  20. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Yes, everything seems very complicated, no easy answers…

  21. Comment from: david@tokyo


    Indeed, why isn’t Iceland continuing their scientific hunt? Have they been able to answer all their questions? What’s next?

  22. Comment from: david@tokyo


    Humpbacks are listed as only vulnerable these days I believe, and Bryde’s whales aren’t listed as endangered either :-) And while Sei whales are right now listed as endangered, the IUCN page says “a change in classification to Vulnerable may be appropriate”.

    Give it a few years :-)

  23. Comment from: Pinxi


    David, if you want to be pedantic pls get yr facts right and in the correct context. I didn’t introduce terrorists into the discussion on SS. I did mention ‘bombers’ earlier without using the word terrorist, and in a different specific context. You compared SS to “smashing airplanes in to buildings ” at October 1, 2006 07:08 PM and accordingly I followed that specific discussion in that frame.

    I’m still curious about the ways in which you frame the concept of humane. I expect that your whaling position puts quite some limitation on the concept. eg on the topic of preserving viable species you say “Humane choices are about animal welfare, not about sustainability (an environmental concern)”

    If sustainability includes biodiversity, as it does, then you dismiss it as inhumane. However evolution, competition and co-operation has at its core the continuation of genes. It seems to be central to humane choices of which species to cull. Your definition of humane only extends to killing methods and not species choice? I’m sure you must consider it a factor.

    George I only said that intelligent factors in to the discussion and you ask me to prove intelligence claims!?! Silly! Which specific claim would you like me to prove? I said it does come into discussions and it does. I said above that I’m not going to get inot that discussion on this thread and it’s been debated on this blog long before, to death. However you can’t deny that cognition and sentience, with size as a proxy(!!?), weigh in to these kind of debates. Otherwise why isn’t Greenpeace out compaigning for the humane treatment of bugs? Think of the inhumane, cruel methods by which flies and mosquitos are killed!

    Ann if you want animals to be as free in the wild as possible then shouldnt you stop eating them?

  24. Comment from: david@tokyo


    > if you want to be pedantic pls get yr facts right

    hmmmmm…

    > I did mention ‘bombers’ earlier without using the word terrorist,

    Was it a different Pinxi that said “terrorist bombers and other perpetrators of genocide” in the post at October 1, 2006 04:26 PM???

    By the way, I’m sure the whalers can live with themselves just as easily as you can inspite of your support for the terrorist organization, SS. I’d rather be a whale killer than support such a group, that’s for certain.

    > If sustainability includes biodiversity, as it does, then you dismiss it as inhumane.

    You seem thoroughly confused… Two issues:
    1) Sustainability and conservation of biological diversity
    2) Humaneness and killing methods

    > Your definition of humane only extends to killing methods and not species choice?

    I don’t know of *any* widely known and accepted definition of humane that extends to species choice. Do you?
    Certainly with regards to the IWC, I’ve seen no argument that different definitions of “humane” should be used for different species. The goal is the same for all species – quick death with the goal being instantaneous insensibility. Whether it’s a blue whale or a minke whale or a sperm whale, the goal of quick death is the same for each.

    > I’m sure you must consider it a factor.

    Why should species be a factor?

    > Otherwise why isn’t Greenpeace out compaigning for the humane treatment of bugs?

    Umm, I wouldn’t try to use Greenpeace’s actions as a basis of any logical argument.

    > Ann if you want animals to be as free in the wild as possible then shouldnt you stop eating them?

    Most people, including the majority of those who oppose whaling, are not opposed to humans consuming animal flesh. They do take a pragmatic stance that animals that are consumed should be treated as “humanely” as possible, rather than cruelly.

  25. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Pixie:”Ann if you want animals to be as free in the wild as possible then shouldnt you stop eating them?”

    Dearest Pinxie, I have been a vegetarian and don’t eat hardly any meat or fish at all, I eat mostly pasta and other junk food…not healthy at all…and I’m not a saint.

    Do you really want to know why I’m not a vegetarian anymore?

    After a speech in a school me and another Greenpeacer were offered lunch, I said I was a vegetarian and the other guy said he was vegan.

    When we told them this I saw that they didn’t take us seriously anymore.

    Same thing happened among the horse people. I said I was a vegetarian, they told me , hell we aren’t, we eat freeranging meat.

  26. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Pixie, you are my favourite person on this blog…

    Why Greenpeace is not campaigning against humane treatment of bugs?

    Actually, we are not campaigning animal cruelty issues at all… yes guys, not even in the whaling issue, surprised now George and David and Pixie.

    Greenpeace has footage from the whale hunt and have exposed the cruelty, but the main focus is opposition of the resumption of commercial whaling.

    The video footage from SOS has been forwarded to IFAW for example to evaluation.

  27. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Sorry. Why Greenpeace is not campaigning for …

  28. Comment from: Ann Novek


    David, they have now catched the stipulated minke quota of about 200 minkes .

    It is extremely difficult to get any information from Iceland.

    Sometimes info is leaking out from politicians and from some fisheries meeting but they keep most information secret , for example you only get the information on quotas in the last minute.

  29. Comment from: Ann Novek


    David, they have now catched the stipulated minke quota of about 200 minkes .

    It is extremely difficult to get any information from Iceland.

    Sometimes info is leaking out from politicians and from some fisheries meeting but they keep most information secret , for example you only get the information on quotas in the last minute.

  30. Comment from: david@tokyo


    I think that is wise on their part. Reducing transparency is a smart tactic when you are targetted in this manner, less media coverage, less fuss. Not really desirable in terms of conservation though, but what can you do when you are maligned no matter what you do?

    Every time the Japanese government or ICR releases figures about whaling activities, the anti-whaling groups seek to use that information to criticise. Why should they bother releasing the information at all if they are just feeding the propaganda machines? EIA’s recent nonsense in particular was atrocious.

    Of course, the GoJ decided to stop providing information about small cetacean hunting several years ago in response to such mischief.

    I did find an article about possible commercial whaling in Iceland (http://www.grapevine.is/?show=paper&part=fullstory&id=1436), it seems they’ll only start if they can find an export market. On the other hand, commercial operations in Iceland should be able to provide whale meat cheaper than the by-products from the JARPA/JARPN programmes, were they to export it to Japan. I don’t think the GoJ would be keen to allow imports while commercial whaling by Japanese nationals is also prohibited though.

    Be sure to visit my blog in the next couple of days – I have been examing the frozen marine product stockpile figures from the MAFF further, and comparing the stockpile for whale products versus other items is quite illuminating ;-)

  31. Comment from: Pinxi


    hey guys, a genuine thanks for the exchange.

    Yes David I do understand the points you’ve made about humane being typically applied to killing methods, and yes, it does make sense. But I equally think you can consider (if you will try) it in the context of species vulnerability to extinction. Given all the survival struggles animals face to thrive, reproduce and continue their lineage, (all to ensure the survival of their (selfish) genes according to popular scientific thought) then shouldn’t we show compassion and sympathy *if* our activities are likely to put a species at risk of extinction? (Note the *if* – this is not a debate of whether or not we ARE putting whales at risk of extinction)

    btw David, seeing we’re both pedantic, I did bring up terrorist bombers but not in relation to SS as I said above. But phew, it’s not fruitful. Yep SS fit in the general definition of terrorists, but social structures and rules always get broken down and reinvented eventually don’t they? Some previous ‘interference’ of theirs was actually upheld in court under UN obligations, you can read about it on their website somewhere. It’s quite interesting.

    Ann – I’m just having fun over your GreenPeas! I’m partial to people dressed up in animal suits. Ever seen the Flaming Lips in concert?

  32. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Dressed up in animal suits, me?? Oh no…

    GreenPeas? Maybe…

    Pea brain? Absolutely…

  33. Comment from: david@tokyo


    > But I equally think you can consider (if you will try) it in the context of species vulnerability to extinction.

    Any species is vulnerable to extinction if it is preyed upon hard enough and reduced below it’s critical dispensation level.

    I don’t understand how one can apply the “humane” concept to an entire species in the first place. A “species” does not experience pain, a species is just a collection of individuals.

    > Yep SS fit in the general definition of terrorists, but social structures and rules always get broken down and reinvented eventually don’t they?

    Yeah, I guess one day Al Qaeda groups will be just your run-of-the-mill friendly neighbours as well.

    > Some previous ‘interference’ of theirs was actually upheld in court under UN obligations, you can read about it on their website somewhere. It’s quite interesting.

    So they got lucky?
    http://www.icrwhale.org/eng/history.pdf
    http://david-in-tokyo.blogspot.com/2006/05/iwc-2006-sea-shepherd-extremism-4.html
    http://david-in-tokyo.blogspot.com/2006/05/iwc-2006-sea-shepherd-extremism-3.html
    http://david-in-tokyo.blogspot.com/2006/05/iwc-2006-sea-shepherd-extremism-2.html
    http://david-in-tokyo.blogspot.com/2006/05/iwc-2006-sea-shepherd-extremism.html

  34. Comment from: George McC


    “Otherwise why isn’t Greenpeace out compaigning for the humane treatment of bugs?”

    `Cos ´nobody would give their hard earned woolah for a ” save the endangered Drosphila ” campaign Pinxi – that´s why ;op

  35. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Well Pinxie, it’s hardly some news that NGOs use sea mammals as poster girls or boys, I believe professional journalists say that they have high
    panda factor.

  36. Comment from: George McC


    Anne,

    If you are still following this thread, here´s a link for you to the results of this years okosystemtokt .. (pa Norsk )

    http://www.imr.no/aktuelt/pressemeldinger/2006/barentshavet_er_varmt_mye_yngel

  37. Comment from: Ann Novek


    Thanks George,
    Interesting article and also interesting to know that white-beaked dolphins were mostly sighted.

    BTW, thumbs up for Norway, seems like they will support a moratorium on high seas bottom trawling!

  38. Comment from: Ann Novek


    To George,
    Maybe Greenpeace wants to raise your and your friends salary!!

    Excerpt from Fiskaren:

    Greenpeace synes også at havforskerne får for lite penger.

  39. Comment from: George McC


    LOL…

    they mean for research …

    Already read it anne … ;o)

  40. Comment from: laminat


    [url=http://skuper.ru]паркет приглашаем[/url]

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] Show All