Sea Shepherd condemned by International Whaling Commission.

[Geoff_H]

It is interesting that you cut out portions of the letter from the Australian govt. to make it appear that they wanted Sea Shepherd to stop. The letter indicates that the Australian govt doesn't want the Sea Shepherd to board the Japanese vessel again as it is a hazard for the Australian govt to transfer the boarders off of one ship and onto the other.

Err, they did want them to stop.

The letter is extremely clear that the Aussie government urges then to restrain themselves, to not do what they have been doing (boarding) and that the Aussies may not bail them out if their dangerous actions get them into trouble.

It really is very clear - which part of

The Australian Government is concerned that your recent public statements indicate that you may be contemplating another boarding of a Japanese vessel in the Southern Ocean.

.....
For this reason, the Australian Government once again calls on you - as it does all parties - to exercise the utmost restraint in your activities in the Southern Ocean.

The Australian Government strongly discourages activity which could be illegal or unsafe activity which could lead to injury or loss of life at sea.

do you think is saying "Please carry on"?

 

[terrillja]

Ten years ago (1998) he supported them, I see no evidence that the support is continued or he approves of the aggressive actions taken recently.

I'll send a recommendation to SS that they have the Dalai Lama renew his letter of support. What would be a reasonable time period for each letter to be valid? 10 years? 1 year?

Tibet is well enough publicized, if the letter was a publicity stunt, he should have sent it to someone with a higher profile.

As for 1998 compared to now, I'll reference SS, who lists the things they did between 1992 and 1998:

1992
In 1992, Sea Shepherd focused its efforts on opposing illegal commercial whaling by Norway. The day after Christmas, a Sea Shepherd crew led by Captain Paul Watson sank the illegally-operated Norwegian whaler Nybraena in the Lofoten Islands in Northern Norway.
1994
In January 1994, a Sea Shepherd crew scuttled the illegal Norwegian whaler Senet in harbor in Southern Norway.

In July of 1994, the Sea Shepherd ship Whales Forever challenged the Norwegian whaling fleet and the Norwegian government directly when Captain Watson took the ship and his crew to the Lofoten Islands to block the whaling ships. He was intercepted by the Norwegian Navy.


The Whales Forever was rammed by the Norwegian destroyer Andenes, fired upon, and had two depth charges deployed under the hull. Although suffering significant damage, the Whales Forever prevented the Norwegians from boarding and returned to the Shetland Islands having severely embarrassed the Norwegian authorities. More importantly, international media attention was brought to bear on the illegality of Norwegian whaling.

1997
In September 1997, Sea Shepherd Pacific Northwest Director Michael Kundu covertly enters Siberia with a media crew to document the killing of whales by Siberian natives. Although his life is threatened, he returns to report to the International Whaling Commission meeting in Monaco. The film crew brings back evidence of the illegal commercial whale hunt, including footage of butchered whales being processed into feed for fox fur farms. Russia continues to claim the slaughter as a "subsistence" hunt, exempt from the moratorium whaling.
1998
In 1998, the illegal Norwegian whaler Morild, owned by the most notorious whale killer in Norway - Stienar Bastesen - was sunk.
Sea Shepherd became a household name in Norway as a result.

In the fall of 1998, at the urging of the commercial whaling industries of Norway and Japan, with promises of lucrative future trade, the Makah Indian tribe claimed a right to resume whale hunting pursuant to a guarantee in their 1855 treaty with the U.S., but in contravention of subsequent international conservation law. Sea Shepherd sent two ships to Neah Bay, Washington, to protect the gray whales. They were joined on the water by a flotilla of local citizens and other anti-whaling activists. Despite mob violence, arrest, and official harassment, the coalition of activists shields the local whales and succeeds in focusing enough media attention to the hunt to make the Makah stand down without taking a single whale.

So in 6 years they sank 3 ships and had an collision with a Norwegian destroyer, and the Dalai Lama supported them then, therefore supporting their actions. Makes the actions of now seem pretty tame (collision with Japanese ship, threw spoiled butter at Japanese ships).

 

[Geoff_H]

As for 1998 compared to now, I'll reference SS, who lists the things they did between 1992 and 1998:
So in 6 years they sank 3 ships and had an collision with a Norwegian destroyer, and the Dalai Lama supported them then, therefore supporting their actions. Makes the actions of now seem pretty tame (collision with Japanese ship, threw spoiled butter at Japanese ships).

Scuttling ships in harbour when there are no people on board - while being an act of vandalism/piracy - is not nearly as unsafe as the recent activities in the Southern Ocean. There was a high risk of collision when the Sea Shepherd boat harrassed the whalers, and this could have easily have been fatal to both parties if they have collided and started sinking thousands of miles from any support.

 

[scubadale]

Following the transfer by the Oceanic Viking of two of your crew members from the Yushin Maru No. 2 to the Steve Irwin on 18 January 2008, you made the public statement that having delivered a letter of protest to the Japanese whaling fleet, you did not see an incident of this kind occurring again.

The Australian Government is concerned that your recent public statements indicate that you may be contemplating another boarding of a Japanese vessel in the Southern Ocean.


You should also understand that it may not be possible for the Australian Government to intervene, in the event of another boarding incident, to facilitate the transfer of people from one vessel to another on the high seas.

Crew members of ships in the Southern Ocean should not attempt to board other vessels.


The Australian Government strongly discourages activity which could be illegal or unsafe activity which could lead to injury or loss of life at sea.

It is CLEAR that the Australian govt. is stating that they might not be in a position to transfer boarders. I also see where the Australian govt discourages activity which could be illegal. The govt did not state that what the SI was doing was illegal nor did they tell them to stop. They discouraged them as the Australian vessel might not be in a position to render aid if necessary.

Maybe "discourage" = "stop" like "whaling" = "research"

 

[terrillja]

Scuttling ships in harbour when there are no people on board - while being an act of vandalism/piracy - is not nearly as unsafe as the recent activities in the Southern Ocean. There was a high risk of collision when the Sea Shepherd boat harrassed the whalers, and this could have easily have been fatal to both parties if they have collided and started sinking thousands of miles from any support.

Well the whalers could have turned and run at any point, and the danger would have been over for both parties involved. I never saw any video of SS steering a boat into an iceberg, but I did see water cannons powerful enough to knock a man over being aimed at a semi-rigid inflatable which was simply shooting video. Also of note, the whaling vessels would have been well marked if they went into distress, SS was kind enough to pre-deploy smoke markers on their deck.

 

[Geoff_H]

Crew members of ships in the Southern Ocean should not attempt to board other vessels.

I guess that's just an opinion of the Australian Government then? Not based on any maritime law?

This beggars belief. I can understand being anti-whaling, but I can't understand the knots you'll tie yourselves in tyring not to believe clear evidence that the Australian government strongly discourages the illegal activities of the Sea Shepherd boat!

 

[D_B]

I have always said, if Japan or any nation wants to kill wales under the premise of "Tradition", I expect to see them row out in a hand-built wooden boat, harpoon the whale, then pull it back to shore and process it on shore. If you want to call it tradition, do it traditionally, without explosives, and without huge processing ships.

From the other thread, I think bears repeating

.... what is a traditional weapon? what time period do you use? what era? ... do we say that you cant use a motor on a boat? ... those "traditional weapons" changed throughout history ... and who are you/us to decide what is traditional for another culture ?

... Someone deciding what is correct for another culture is a button of mine, me being part Native American

 

[Geoff_H]

Well the whalers could have turned and run at any point, and the danger would have been over for both parties involved.

LOL. So I can come into your home, start robbing you under gun point and then I could use the excuse that you could have turned and run at any point and so wouldn't have been in any danger!

Keep them coming guys, this is hilarious.

Also of note, the whaling vessels would have been well marked if they went into distress, SS was kind enough to pre-deploy smoke markers on their deck.

That's nice, then they would have started smoking as they sunk beneath the waves, thousands of miles from any help. Classy.

 

[terrillja]

LOL. So I can come into your home, start robbing you under gun point and then I could use the excuse that you could have turned and run at any point and so wouldn't have been in any danger!

Keep them coming guys, this is hilarious.



That's nice, then they would have started smoking as they sunk beneath the waves, thousands of miles from any help. Classy.

Well I would equate it to me coming home to see you shooting at the dog which lives in the town. Sure it doesn't belong to anyone, but everyone sort of takes care of it until you decide you can just shoot it. I'd chase you away for sure. It isn't my dog, but what right do you have to shoot it?

As for no help, there are all the harpoon vessels nearby, and I'm sure SS would be more than willing to lend aid. They are humans after all.

 

[scubadale]

I guess that's just an opinion of the Australian Government then? Not based on any maritime law?

This beggars belief. I can understand being anti-whaling, but I can't understand the knots you'll tie yourselves in tyring not to believe clear evidence that the Australian government strongly discourages the illegal activities of the Sea Shepherd boat!

So your backing of the stop and changing to strongly discourages, I agree with you that they strongly discourage the activities. I don't see anything in the letter that states the activities are illegal. Since they are in, per Australia, Australian waters why did Australia not prosecute if the SS was conducting illegal activities???