Breaking news from the whale wars

[drbill]

I'm surprised the actions of the hippies and huggers aren't seen as piracy.

Hippies? What a laugh. You apparently have never met one.

 

[drbill]

Morally - I have no problem with killing animals to research and eat. I happily eat pigs, cows, fish, dogs and plenty of other animals too.

I don't either, but I do have a difference of opinion when it comes to sentient, social species whose numbers have been decimated by past whaling activities.

And I hope you don't mind if my friends the Xanadusians enjoy eating the flesh of human beings like yourself when they arrive from their planet. We are all part of the Mutual Eating Society... and humans may NOT always be THE apex predators.

 

[Scott L]

I'm surprised the actions of the hippies and huggers aren't seen as piracy. I may be wrong but I believe that interfering with another vessel, (trying to rope their propellers, throwing stink bombs, etc.) and attacking it is illegal. According to maritime law, can't pirates be dealt with by death? The Japanese would only be defending themselves. I'm not saying whaling or 'research' is right or wrong, but in my opinion the attempts by the Sea Shepherd and cronies seem to be the wrong way to go about changing things, and they seem to be more of attention seekers than problem solvers.

Greenpeace's passive approach has certainly not been effective in years past. The incident is leading on the front page of most news sources the past few days. I guarantee you world-wide public opionion is on the side of those protecting the whales and not those culling whales by the thousands for "research" purposes. Will it ultimately end commercial whaling? At the very least, it's high theater...

 

[Geoff_H]

They know the way Sea Shepherd plays the media, they have to document what really happened. The video clearly shows the trimaran deliberately cutting across the bow of the whaler. According to the rules of the road, the whaler was the burdened vessel and must give way. The question is was it unavoidable by the whaler.

Hmm, I would read it differently.

Rule 13
Overtaking

(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rules of Part B, Sections I and II, any vessel overtaking any other shall keep out of the way of the vessel being overtaken.

(b) A vessel shall be deemed to be overtaking when coming up with a another vessel from a direction more than 22.5 degrees abaft her beam, that is, in such a position with reference to the vessel she is overtaking, that at night she would be able to see only the sternlight of that vessel but neither of her sidelights.

(c) When a vessel is in any doubt as to whether she is overtaking another, she shall assume that this is the case and act accordingly.

(d) Any subsequent alteration of the bearing between the two vessels shall not make the overtaking vessel a crossing vessel within the meaning of these Rules or relieve her of the duty of keeping clear of the overtaken vessel until she is finally past and clear.

Rule 16

Action by Give-way Vessel

Every vessel which is directed to keep out of the way of another vessel shall, so far as possible, take early and substantial action to keep well clear.

Rule 17

Action by Stand-on Vessel

(a)
(i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way of the other shall keep her course and speed.
(ii) The latter vessel may however take action to avoid collision by her maneuver alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in accordance with these Rules.

(b) When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.

(c) A power driven vessel which takes action in a crossing situation in accordance with subparagraph (a)(ii) of this Rule to avoid collision with another power driven vessel shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, not alter course to port for a vessel on her own port side.

(d) This Rule does not relieve the give-way vessel of her obligation to keep out of the way.

Ady Gil was clearly the overtaking vessel - she moved from astern at the start of the video, to ahead, and then cuts in front. The rules posted state that in this situation she is still considered the overtaking vessel and is obliged to keep clear.

Rule 13d is applicable, as it is clear the Ady Gil was not past and clear. There is little doubt in my mind this is a stunt by Sea Shepherd.

Even if it was not, putting your fibre glass hull in the way of a steel hulled whaling vessel is crassly bad seamanship and the "Captain" of the Ady Gil was clearly endangering the life of his crew by getting that close the fishing boat in the first place.

 

[Geoff_H]

The incident is leading on the front page of most news sources the past few days.

Really? Quite impressive since it just happened today.

 

[Tigerman]

I see the idiots crewing the Ady Gil engineered a collision with one of the Japanese whaling ships and got themselves sunk.

This madness has to end or people will die.

It serves them right! They have been trying to sink ships themselves for years and now they get a taste of their own medicine and get upset about it..
Well, what the hell do they expect??

 

[Scott L]

Really? Quite impressive since it just happened today.

Study up.

International Date Line - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Geoff_H]

I don't either, but I do have a difference of opinion when it comes to sentient, social species whose numbers have been decimated by past whaling activities.

Can you back up this assertion with some evidence? I'm not saying you are right or wrong, but I see a lot of hyperbole and claims from BOTH sides of the argument. Most of the evidence that I have seen has not convinced me either way.

It seems we simply don't have much idea of the true numbers of whales in our oceans, now or 50 years or 100 years ago. We also don't know the effect that human whaling has had or continues to have on their numbers. I would be interested if you have any research that can convincingly demonstrate this effect?

Whale numbers surveys seem similar to climate numbers to me - fundamentally difficult to measure accurately, lots of small samples being extrapolated out, figures "adjusted" to make comparisons accurate and - ultimately - little hard evidence for correlation of human activity with any trends that have been "established" by academics who depend on writing headline grabbing stories to enhance their chances of a new research grant.

 

[Geoff_H]

Study up.

International Date Line - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Grow up! For your inaccurate assertion to be true....

The incident is leading on the front page of most news sources the past few days

... try finding some articles dated from a "few days ago" covering this ramming incident. I'll let you use any timezone you like

 

[Wookie]

Hmm, I would read it differently.







Ady Gil was clearly the overtaking vessel - she moved from astern at the start of the video, to ahead, and then cuts in front. The rules posted state that in this situation she is still considered the overtaking vessel and is obliged to keep clear.

Rule 13d is applicable, as it is clear the Ady Gil was not past and clear. There is little doubt in my mind this is a stunt by Sea Shepherd.

Even if it was not, putting your fibre glass hull in the way of a steel hulled whaling vessel is crassly bad seamanship and the "Captain" of the Ady Gil was clearly endangering the life of his crew by getting that close the fishing boat in the first place.

I disagree, I do not see this as an overtaking situation, but as a crossing situation. The Andy Gil was clearly the Stand-on vessel, the whaler was clearly the Burdened vessel.

HOWEVER

Both captains must act prudently to avoid a collision. It is obvious also from the video that the Andy Gil was underway and making way in such a manner to cause the collision. Engines were clearly engaged, as there is prop wash behind the vessel, as well as wake. There is no indication that there is prop wash forward up the sides of the Andy Gil, as there would be if the skipper had showered down in reverse to avoid a collision.

I put the actions of the Sea Shepherd crew on par with Jihadists, and the crew of the Andy Gil on par with suicide bombers. They knew there would be a collision, they knew that they would lose the Andy Gil, and there were volunteers manning the Andy Gil that were willing to drown for the whales. I understand this, as I hate shark long-liners the way Sea Shepherd hates whalers. I'm just waiting for the mini-torpedos.