PDA

View Full Version : Sea Shepherd Trimaran Sunk for Scientific Purposes?



Pages : [1] 2

seanz
01-06-2010, 05:12 AM
One of the Sea Shepherd boats (ex-Earthrace) has been rammed and sunk by a Japanese ship.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10618713



The crew of the New Zealand trimaran harassing Japanese whalers in the Southern Ocean had to be rescued after their boat was allegedly rammed and sunk by a Japanese ship, anti-whaling group Sea Shepherd Conservation Society says.
The confrontation is thought to have happened early today in the area of Commonwealth Bay off the Adelie Coast of Antarctica


There was a story on the radio news about a group of Australian scientists heading to the Southern ocean to do some non-lethal whale research. Let's hope that embarasses the Japanese into stopping this charade before someone gets killed.

PeterSibley
01-06-2010, 05:32 AM
Just tissue sampling Sean .

The Bigfella
01-06-2010, 05:57 AM
I reckon that if someone went across my bow whilst towing a large, long rope, I'd concentrate more on avoiding it by attempting to cross just in front of where the rope ended too.

Not that I like Japanese whalers.

WX
01-06-2010, 06:04 AM
Maybe we should start sampling Japanese whalers...for scientific purposes of course.

J P
01-06-2010, 06:25 AM
Video of the collision (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dXCR9LX-Kc) already up on youtube.

Does appear deliberate. Check out the japanese crewman just standing there watching and the stern water canon firing on the wreckage ... "and take that!" I wonder if they went back and assisted in any rescue?


ETA: hmmm ... after re-watching that it looks like the Ady Gil accelerated forward in the last few seconds.

seanz
01-06-2010, 06:35 AM
I reckon that if someone went across my bow whilst towing a large, long rope, I'd concentrate more on avoiding it by attempting to cross just in front of where the rope ended too.

Not that I like Japanese whalers.

Bit of a tactical error then? That's not very big boat to be towing the size of rope that could foul a ships propeller.....would've slowed them down a bit.

PeterSibley
01-06-2010, 06:37 AM
Wire with floats next time ,maybe 2m down .

Captain Blight
01-06-2010, 06:38 AM
I reckon that if someone went across my bow whilst towing a large, long rope, I'd concentrate more on avoiding it by attempting to cross just in front of where the rope ended too.

Not that I like Japanese whalers.One could also knock the engines out of gear. Lots of things one could do before ramming.

peter radclyffe
01-06-2010, 06:39 AM
how green was my plastic,
this may need some explaining for anyone who doesnt know the film of the beauty of the welsh valleys
there talking about looking after the planet
it would be more environmentally sound to use a wooden boat

seanz
01-06-2010, 06:47 AM
it would be more environmentally sound to use a wooden boat


Perhaps it time to post a thread in Designs/Plans?
;):)

George.
01-06-2010, 07:01 AM
mmm ... after re-watching that it looks like the Ady Gil accelerated forward in the last few seconds.

I am not sure about that. It looks like it might be the suction effect that Andrew recently posted about, which sucks a small boat towards the midsection of a passing ship. The bearing from the camera to the Sea Shepherd boat looks fairly constant during the approach.

I think the Sea Shepherds meant to have the Japs graze their bow, which would result in good publicity footage, and the Japanese thug boat meant to give them a scare. They both miscalculated due to the larger hull's suction.

Of course, that fire hose hitting the people on the small boat after it was rammed, nearly washing the poor sods into the Southern Ocean, is going to look really bad for the whaler thugs no matter what. Score one for the Shepherds.

J P
01-06-2010, 07:31 AM
I am not sure about that. It looks like it might be the suction effect that Andrew recently posted about, which sucks a small boat towards the midsection of a passing ship. The bearing from the camera to the Sea Shepherd boat looks fairly constant during the approach.

I think the Sea Shepherds meant to have the Japs graze their bow, which would result in good publicity footage, and the Japanese thug boat meant to give them a scare. They both miscalculated due to the larger hull's suction.

Of course, that fire hose hitting the people on the small boat after it was rammed, nearly washing the poor sods into the Southern Ocean, is going to look really bad for the whaler thugs no matter what. Score one for the Shepherds.

Maybe so George, I haven't read Andrew's post on that. (note to self: suction sucks!)

Dangerous game for sure.

Interesting the video footy comes from the Japanese boat. Doesn't look good from that point of view. I wonder what the translation of the voices in the audio is?

Krunch
01-06-2010, 07:37 AM
Maybe Captain Kangaroo should stick to children's television programming.

George.
01-06-2010, 07:40 AM
Also, note the Shepherds were approaching from starboard.

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
01-06-2010, 07:46 AM
Also, note the Shepherds were approaching from starboard.

And did what to avoid the collision?


If they want to play "chicken" with heavy traffic in the southern ocean then they should expect to die.

mmd
01-06-2010, 07:58 AM
Echoing the comment about having no love for Japanese whalers (or any other nationality, for that matter), I have to admit to two criticisms of the Sea Shepherd organization:

1.) I think that the Sea Shepherd intent of saving marine wildlife and habitat is good, but I don't like their methods, and...
2.) If you're going to try to bully somebody off of their intent, you had better be bigger and stronger than them.

George.
01-06-2010, 08:08 AM
I disagree. They are playing to a global audience. Their best bet is to play the well-meaning underdog. Footage like the one on this thread is priceless. It makes the Shepherds look heroic and the Japanese look like thugs.

I don't like their methods, and I don't like the Japanese methods either. But if we are to believe in the concept of freedom of the seas, then we have to recognize that it allows not only gross overfishing and killing of whales in international waters, but also for activists to tow ropes about the ocean as they please, and stand on when they have the right-of-way just like fishing boat towing a trawl net would.

Newt: you are correct. Part of the blame might be apportioned to the Shepherds for not maneuvering at the last minute to avoid an imminent collision. I say might, because they would allege that they did not anticipate the suction effect, and that they were towing a line and therefore restricted in their ability to maneuver.

That said, if it were two British-flag vessels, and the incident had taken place in the Solent in full view of a thousand witnesses, which party do you reckon might face criminal charges?

Figment
01-06-2010, 08:29 AM
Footage like the one on this thread is priceless. It makes the Shepherds look heroic and the Japanese look like thugs.


I disagree.

Footage like this shows the Shepherds to be the publicity whores they are.

The Andy Gil absolutely accelerated into the path of that ship. Suction doesn't make propwash.

They had a fast sexy boat which was poorly suited to their operational purposes, and which they probably couldn't afford to maintain (or fuel), so they used it for far more valuable publicity.
They put themselves in harm's way, and harm quite conveniently found them.

Clowns afloat.

(I agree with their mission, but abhor their methods)

J P
01-06-2010, 08:55 AM
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/picsonline/AdyGil.jpg

It does appear the Ady Gil is accelerating forward ahead of the whaler's bow wave.
Oops, maybe they meant to reverse. :eek:

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
01-06-2010, 09:01 AM
....
That said, if it were two British-flag vessels, and the incident had taken place in the Solent in full view of a thousand witnesses, which party do you reckon might face criminal charges?

Both.

You'd get interesting side-bets on penalties.


Is martyrdom always honourable?

George.
01-06-2010, 09:10 AM
Footage like this shows the Shepherds to be the publicity whores they are.

Of course they are publicity whores. Their boats are bought for them by Hollywood celebrities. The donors want to see footage like that on CNN, so all their friends can see how generous and environmentally aware they are. I assure you that that video will be seen very favorably in the right circles in LA.

You might be surprised at how many staid and respected NGOs are publicity whores. The Washington and NY-based ones are more subtle about their whoring than the California ones, but in essence that is how public advocacy works.

TomF
01-06-2010, 09:18 AM
You might be surprised at how many staid and respected NGOs are publicity whores. The Washington and NY-based ones are more subtle about their whoring than the California ones, but in essence that is how public advocacy works.Hear the man.

The whole game is getting visibility, so your issue translates into electoral pressure. This is precisely how public advocacy works, whether your issue is whaling, medical research, welfare rates, organic agriculture, or whatever it is that "teabaggers" are in favour of.

Phillip Allen
01-06-2010, 09:36 AM
I'd like to see the whaling stopped...period

that said...towing a rope under another vessel is an act of piracy...load with grap shot

Phillip Allen
01-06-2010, 09:38 AM
it looks as though, once they achieved their collision they had no trouble reversing at a pretty high rate...

I'm thinking it may have been a deliberate "touch" that got out of hand...(did I ever say how much I hate liars?)

Krunch
01-06-2010, 09:53 AM
they would allege that they did not anticipate the suction effect

Hmmm...would that be bank suction ... or bow cushion? :confused:

Phillip Allen
01-06-2010, 09:57 AM
I've now looked at it several times...the small craft attacked the larger...period

TimH
01-06-2010, 10:34 AM
/EIN Presswire/ January 5th, 2010 To Interview Captain Paul Watson on board the Steve Irwin SAT Phone: (00) 8816 4145 4434 (From the U.S. dial 011, from Australia 0011) Sea Shepherd Conservation Society -International Headquarters – U.S. Contact: Amy Baird, Media Director Office: 360-370-5650 Email: media@seashepherd.org For related images and video: http://media.seashepherd.org Sea Shepherd Unveils Surprise New Vessel: Bob Barker Bob Barker Donates $5,000,000 to Sea Shepherd for Ocean Conservation Another whaling ship arrived in the Southern Ocean today, unexpected and right on time: the Bob Barker. The 1,200-ton Norwegian built Antarctic harpoon vessel caught up with the Japanese whaling fleet at 0300 Hours on Wednesday, January 6th, in the area of Commonwealth Bay off the Adelie Coast at 143 Degrees 17 Minutes East and 66 Degrees 43 Minutes South. Thanks to a $5,000,000 contribution from American television personality and icon Bob Barker, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society was able to quietly purchase and refit the former Norwegian whaler in Africa. The ice strengthened fast chaser boat quietly departed from Mauritius on December 18th to join up with the Sea Shepherd ships Steve Irwin and Ady Gil in the Southern Ocean. Barker has also funded the cost of a helicopter that will accompany the society’s ships. The aircraft is named The Nancy Burnet after the president of United Activists for Animal Rights, an organization Barker also supports. This new helicopter will participate in future campaigns. “I’m delighted to be able to help the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society in its mission to end the destruction of habitat and slaughter of wildlife in the world’s oceans,” said Barker. “There is lot of talk about preserving our ecosystems and species, but this is one organization that puts these words into action.” For the first time ever, Sea Shepherd has three ships on the Japanese fleet. Thanks to the generous support of Bob Barker, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has been given the means to seriously impact the profits of the whaling industry this season. “We intend to bankrupt the whalers,” said Captain Paul Watson. The Bob Barker is currently in pursuit of the whaling fleet. END About Sea Shepherd Conservation Society Established in 1977, Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (SSCS) is an International non-profit conservation organization whose mission is to end the destruction of habitat and slaughter of wildlife in the world’s oceans in order to conserve and protects ecosystems and species. Sea Shepherd uses innovative direct-action tactics to investigate, document, and take action when necessary to expose and confront illegal activities on the high seas. By safeguarding the biodiversity of our delicately-balanced ocean ecosystems, Sea Shepherd works to ensure their survival for future generations. Founder and President Captain Paul Watson, is a renowned, respected leader in environmental issues. Visit www.seashepherd.org for more information.

Source: Sea Shepherd Unveils Surprise New Vessel: Bob Barker | Business & Finance News | Stock Market | equity | Investment (http://trak.in/india/sea-shepherd-unveils-surprise-new-vessel-bob-barker/economy-48237/#ixzz0bqYueMHl)

seanz
01-06-2010, 03:12 PM
Is martyrdom always honourable?

You have to ask? ;)

Hadn't considered that the Sea Shepherd crew might have wanted to be sunk........but now it's been mentioned, I wouldn't put it past them.

TimH
01-06-2010, 03:19 PM
That was an almost 2 million dollar boat.

Sea Sheperd crew members (pirates I guess)

http://www.seashepherd.org/images/stories/get-involved/crew_benefits_make_good_friends_large.jpg

Captain Blight
01-06-2010, 03:34 PM
I'd hit it.

Bill R
01-06-2010, 04:54 PM
I'd hit it.

Too late. The whaling ship already did.

Ian McColgin
01-06-2010, 05:08 PM
I thought that the tri was accelerated by the collision. Anyway, I must also apologize for starting a seperate thread after this.

Keith Wilson
01-06-2010, 05:09 PM
after re-watching that it looks like the Ady Gil accelerated forward in the last few seconds. It sure looks that way. There's lots of prop wash, and the Batboat started moving much faster. If they were towing something intended to foul the whaler's prop, perhaps they were trying to pass as close to the bow as possible and miscalculated. I also expect the guy on the stern water cannon didn't yet realize the extent of the damage.

ian scott
01-06-2010, 05:30 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Brw6JN0lQXY&feature=related

From footage taken from the Bob Barker it appears the Ady Gil was not accelerating forward (see about 1.20 on in the vid). Paul Watson from Sea Shepherd says the Ady Gil was in reverse.

Pity about the boat.

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
01-06-2010, 05:34 PM
In reverse....

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/picsonline/AdyGil.jpg


really?

Keith Wilson
01-06-2010, 05:36 PM
From footage taken from the Bob Barker it appears the Ady Gil was not accelerating forward Odd. I see exactly the opposite in both videos. It appears that immediately before the collision the trimaran had started to accelerate forward, either trying to pass across the bow of the whaler or to deliberately ram it. That propwash doesn't look like reverse to me. I have no sympathy for whaling at all, but the collision certainly seems to be either deliberate or a major screwup on the part of the Ady Gill.

TimH
01-06-2010, 05:38 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Brw6JN0lQXY&feature=related

From footage taken from the Bob Barker it appears the Ady Gil was not accelerating forward (see about 1.20 on in the vid). Paul Watson from Sea Shepherd says the Ady Gil was in reverse.

Pity about the boat.

Pretty obvious from that footage that they were sitting dead in the water and the Japanese boat changed course to ram them. You can see the exhaust start pumping water as he started the engines just before the collision and then out it in reverse....a little to late.

The Australian navy should get involved. These Japanese are poaching illegally in a marine sanctuary. If I went out and poached a black bear for its gall bladder I would end up in the slammer.

WX
01-06-2010, 05:42 PM
I don't see any substantial acceleration, as the 2 ships got closer together the apparent speed of Ady Gil would appear higher. However I take it AG was trying to cross the bows of the Jap ship and foul the prop with a line?
The only way Sea Shepherd has of stopping Japanese whaling is though harassment and publicity. No one else is doing anything that is having any effect. Australia sent a ship down last year but I don't think this is being done this year. There are moves afoot to stop the Japs from chartering whaling spotting aircraft from Australia but that will take time has it will probably run through the courts.
meantime watch this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-ga-XGJJ7E

Keith Wilson
01-06-2010, 06:01 PM
Watch the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Brw6JN0lQXY&feature=related) carefully. Up to about 0:55 the trimaran is moving very slowly if at all; at 0:56 there's a large amount of prop wash and it moves forward quite abruptly, NOT in reverse.. The collision occurs at about 1:02.

WX
01-06-2010, 06:10 PM
So we have a lot of dislike for Sea Shepherd while being anti whaling.
How do you stop the Japanese from whaling when no country will stand up to them?
it's a waste of time making treaties or setting up reserves if the Japs don't honour them.

Ian McColgin
01-06-2010, 06:16 PM
Keith is right that there's prop wash a second or so before impact. The video also shows no change in the relative motion, that is the Ady Gil did not increase speed. They may have meant to, but they were still falling astern until the impact when they were pulled ahead briefly.

The next video seems to confirm this. It's a little hard to tell whether the apparant course changes of the whaler towards the tri are from the camera boat's changing angle or from an actual turn. Either way, like the first video, that one does not show me any acceleration by Ady.

It's hard to be sure without instant by instant analysis, which I'm sure will be coming from everybody.

htom
01-06-2010, 06:29 PM
They tried to dash in front of the whaler and didn't make it. Opps. I have about as much sympathy for them as I do for those who try to dash across the tracks in front of an on-coming train.

WX
01-06-2010, 06:33 PM
So no one wants to suggest a better way to stop whaling, other than direct action?

Phillip Allen
01-06-2010, 06:34 PM
ss did accelerate into the collision...mr watson then said they were in reverse...he has established himself as a liar...nuff said

the most recent vid for me to see shows a distorted long range camera shot from considerablely to the port of the Japanese ship's track...likely meant to cause the colision to appear the fault of the larger ship...established pattern of lies and valadated by the vedios...

in the end, people will believe the ref's cheated against their "team"

Phillip Allen
01-06-2010, 06:36 PM
So no one wants to suggest a better way to stop whaling, other than direct action?

so killing is okay? or maybe when someone does die it'll be the Japanese fault by defination...is that is?

Pugwash
01-06-2010, 06:42 PM
So no one wants to suggest a better way to stop whaling, other than direct action?

It would seem not.


The money spent by his organization would be better spent on lobbyists pushing for economic sanctions against Japan.

However, more bloody "lobbyists" has some support....:rolleyes:

*shakes head* smiley.

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
01-06-2010, 06:47 PM
So no one wants to suggest a better way to stop whaling, other than direct action?

Direct action is UTTERLY INEFFECTIVE - as has been amply demonstrated over the last ten years.

There is no point in making stupid gestures and news snippets which play well to the audience in the USA, Canada, Australia, Enn Zed and the UK - none of these people are doing any whaling.

If you want to make meaningful progress you have to persuade - the Japanese, the Norwegians, the Icelanders and any other nation which wants to go whale hunting.

Or go the diplomatic route - google IWC votes and japan.

WX
01-06-2010, 06:52 PM
What economic sanctions could you impose that would have any effect?

delecta
01-06-2010, 07:12 PM
I'm confused. Is whaling legal and are the Japanese within their rights to do such?

Seems to me that if they are shouldn't these high priced objectors be put in prison?

Concordia...41
01-06-2010, 07:21 PM
Yet another one not in favor of whaling, but I think these high-priced objectors need something - maybe still photographs and a copy of Photoshop if they're going with this news feed:



Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's fast new trimaran, sitting dead in the water, appears to have been deliberately rammed and critically damaged by the much larger Japanese whaling ship (the Shona... (emphasis added above)

That's why the Japanese filmed it. :rolleyes: They knew these folks would say they were just sitting there "dead in the water" minding their business and the big bad whaling ship ran them down.

Part of me admires folks who will risk all for what they believe, but another part of me really thinks these folks are right up there with the PETA folks and the environmental group in the NW that burned the housing developments and the car lots. :mad:

Believe in something fine. Break the law to get your way. No. Make a big publicity stunt out of breaking the law to get your way. Definitely NOT! :mad:


If you like carbon fiber, that was a pretty hot boat - but then I'm sure someone will donate another one to them... :rolleyes:

seanz
01-06-2010, 07:25 PM
All you'd have to do is raise tariffs to the point that it costs more to continue whaling than to stop. I'm sure manufacturers in the US would love to see high tariffs imposed on Japanese makers.

Doug

Yes Doug, good idea, US trade restrictions on Japan have a long history of success.
:rolleyes:
As to your previous posts...."Ultra-violent".....:confused: they're not even as frightening as Somalian pirates.


I'm confused. Is whaling legal and are the Japanese within their rights to do such?

Seems to me that if they are shouldn't these high priced objectors be put in prison?

Yes you are, No and no, it might seem like that, but, remember, you're confused......what law have they broken?

Bob Triggs
01-06-2010, 07:32 PM
It was only a matter of time before the idiot captain's hubris would result in something like this. You can not use a vessel to attack another vessel on the high seas and not pay a price. Its too bad he attracted so many naive young idealists into service and then put them at mortal risk. The man is an idiot.

seanz
01-06-2010, 07:33 PM
Yet another one not in favor of whaling, but I think these high-priced objectors need something - maybe still photographs and a copy of Photoshop if they're going with this news feed:

(emphasis added above)

That's why the Japanese filmed it. :rolleyes: They knew these folks would say they were just sitting there "dead in the water" minding their business and the big bad whaling ship ran them down.

Part of me admires folks who will risk all for what they believe, but another part of me really thinks these folks are right up there with the PETA folks and the environmental group in the NW that burned the housing developments and the car lots. :mad:

Believe in something fine. Break the law to get your way. No. Make a big publicity stunt out of breaking the law to get your way. Definitely NOT! :mad:


If you like carbon fiber, that was a pretty hot boat - but then I'm sure someone will donate another one to them... :rolleyes:

Housing developments are not (usually) illegal...... whaling is......if no governments will stand up to the Japanese, what is wrong with an NGO engaging in protest and attempting to stop illegal activity?

For the record......I never liked that boat.
;)

seanz
01-06-2010, 07:42 PM
ShawnZee...it appears you are equally confused.

IWC has no legal standing, other than what is afforded by nations which have joined in. Japan has not, hence, they are not breaking any applicable law. If the adherents to IWC can not or will not enforce their rulings, no world court will.

This IWC?
http://www.iwcoffice.org/commission/members.htm
that Japan is a member of?
Or some other IWC that you just made up?

Steve McMahon
01-06-2010, 07:51 PM
Thanks for posting this. It gave me my smile for the day. Paul Watson and his band of pirates has again met up with someone that has the balls to say enough is enough. Perhaps the Japanese could come over here and help us with the seal hunt. Maybe there is a solution here - we could offer the Japanese access to the seal herd in exchange for them eliminating their whale hunting? Maybe our fishermen could get jobs working on the Japanese boats sealing?

David G
01-06-2010, 07:53 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Brw6JN0lQXY&feature=related

From footage taken from the Bob Barker it appears the Ady Gil was not accelerating forward (see about 1.20 on in the vid). Paul Watson from Sea Shepherd says the Ady Gil was in reverse.

Pity about the boat.


I assumed from the first video that I saw - the footage taken looking down over the rail of the whaler - that the Batboat initiated the collision. Perhaps deliberately, perhaps by misjudgment. It certainly appears that - at the last moment - the Batboat accelerates forward. I speculated that maybe it was an attempt at a "brush" for propaganda purposes.

Now, having watched the video above, I'm more inclined to think that the whaler rammed the smaller boat. There's really not enough video extant to tell for sure. But this video seems to show the Batboat idling ahead of and to starboard of the bigger boat - but out of its direct path. From this view, bow-on to the whaler, it appears that the bigger boat veers, at speed, into the smaller boat. That change in perspective sharply alters my suspicions about who was the reckless one here. Now I think that last-minute lurch by the Batboat may have been a desperate, hopeless, attempt to make way and get away... by crossing in front, or by shearing off. There was no time to do either.

FWIW - it would be hard for me to fix motive on the fellow operating the stern water cannon. The overall situation clearly changed dramatically in a moment. His continuing to strafe the Batboat after the collision may have been a regrettable failure to apprehend the change in circumstances... or craven, heartless, thuggery... or something else entirely. Again, not enough evidence to start slinging accusations as to motive. If it comes to a criminal prosecution, however, he'll be liable for his actions - even if his motive can not be determined.

Krunch
01-06-2010, 07:57 PM
Direct action is UTTERLY INEFFECTIVE - as has been amply demonstrated over the last ten years.

Utterly ineffective at stopping whaling, yes.

But that's not the purpose. Fundraising is. And stunts like these are profoundly effective for that.

If whaling ended, the Sea Shepherds would be looking for work...and their next crusade.

Can you say "job security"?

seanz
01-06-2010, 07:57 PM
Thanks for posting this. It gave me my smile for the day. Paul Watson and his band of pirates has again met up with someone that has the balls to say enough is enough. Perhaps the Japanese could come over here and help us with the seal hunt. Maybe there is a solution here - we could offer the Japanese access to the seal herd in exchange for them eliminating their whale hunting? Maybe our fishermen could get jobs working on the Japanese boats sealing?

Don't ask us. Ask your local fishermen......then tell us what they said.

Concordia...41
01-06-2010, 08:02 PM
Housing developments are not (usually) illegal...... whaling is......if no governments will stand up to the Japanese, what is wrong with an NGO engaging in protest and attempting to stop illegal activity?

For the record......I never liked that boat.
;)

Well the point of the whaling thing being illegal is another argument, but I don't think this guy should put his crew nor the crew of the whaling ship in danger.

Folks can come unglued and yell at me all you want. I just don't think any one person should endanger the lives of others for what they personally feel is right or wrong.

- M

seanz
01-06-2010, 08:19 PM
That's the IWC. Japan doesn't agree with them, and loses the vote on extending the moratorium every time it comes up. They get around it by saying they are harvesting whales for science. The IWC doesn't enforce their own rules, so Japan doesn't feel any need to stop their scientific whaling.

This really isn't difficult to figure out. If enough of the world is serious about ending a practice they don't like, all they have to do is blow away the offender. Give them a warning or 12 (UN Declaration #?????), and if they don't comply, use force.

It boils down to this: the adherents to IWC rules aren't serious enough to use force to stop the non-adherents. Part of it may have to do with the fact the science isn't 'settled.' No one is sure the Whale Census is accurate. No one is sure what impact whale hunting has on the existing populations. One set of figures indicates shipping collisions account for 90% of whale fatalities, and by-catch is in second place, while hunting is in third place.

We (the world) has a billion-dollar industry in near-shore whale watching, and they condition whales to be friendly and inquisitive to boats. Those whales don't stay near-shore, but they're conditioning goes with them everywhere they travel. This makes them easier to hit with oceanic shipping and easier to hunt for whalers.

Nothing is as simple as it seems.

Gibberish......nobody is sure if the whale census is accurate because the whales won't fill out the forms? Violence is fine to stop whaling but only if people we like do it? Tourists are responsible for whale deaths?
Yes, the Japanese (IWC members, by the way) say they are harvesting whales for science.......they're lying......they're lying fascist pirates.
They refuse to recognize a sanctuary because it doesn't suit them and deliberately hunt inside its limits......because they're bullying fascist pirates and they think nobody will stand up to them.

The Bigfella
01-06-2010, 08:35 PM
If a country, like Australia, sets up a whale preserve, or protected habitat, they better be ready to enforce it, just like they should protect any other national limits to the use of what they consider to be their waters. If a Japanese whaler encroaches, blow them away.

Where is the UN on this issue? Where is NATO? In my opinion, this is similar to the piracy issue. If individuals (or nations) are flagrantly breaking rules/laws, they should be forcefully sanctioned.

Unfortunately, we have a Prime Minister, sans gonads, whose greatest accomplishment to date being the writing of a childrens' book (whilst in office) about his cat and dog. Our Minister for (anti)Whaling has some good music in his past, but has also achieved nothing since he gave up music and took a political portfolio. I believe he's going back to music, having forsaken the poor whales.

TimH
01-06-2010, 08:42 PM
Now, having watched the video above, I'm more inclined to think that the whaler rammed the smaller boat. There's really not enough video extant to tell for sure. But this video seems to show the Batboat idling ahead of and to starboard of the bigger boat - but out of its direct path. From this view, bow-on to the whaler, it appears that the bigger boat veers, at speed, into the smaller boat. That change in perspective sharply alters my suspicions about who was the reckless one here. Now I think that last-minute lurch by the Batboat may have been a desperate, hopeless, attempt to make way and get away... by crossing in front, or by shearing off. There was no time to do either.



Thats EXACTLY what it looks like to me. A drastic course change of the whaler toward the stationary batboat, then a fairly drastic course change away from it after ramming it squarely. I think the batboat was trying to accelerate into a parallel course as an evasive move.

Australian Court Orders Japan to Stop Whaling

http://www.hsus.org/web-files/hr9.gifhttp://www.hsus.org/web-files/spacer.gifhttp://www.hsus.org/web-files/spacer.gifJanuary 15, 2008


http://www.hsus.org/web-files/Whale/281x144_fin_whale.jpgNOAAJapan plans to kill 50 fin whales this year.

After years of protesting the Japanese whale hunt, Humane Society International (HSI) won its lawsuit today when the Australian Federal Court ruled that the Japanese whaling company Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha is in breach of Australian Law by killing whales in Australian waters that are designated as a whale sanctuary.
The Antarctic sanctuary—created in 2000 by Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act—is where Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha (the company that owns the Japanese whaling fleet) kills 90 percent of the whales the Japanese government has authorized it to hunt. Since 2000, Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha has killed 1,253 whales in the sanctuary.
This historic ruling marks the first time that Japan has been taken to domestic court to account for its illegal whaling program. HSI hopes that Japan will take this as a cue to end the gruesome whaling process once and for all.

link (http://www.hsus.org/hsi/oceans/whales/pro_whaling_nations/japan/)

seanz
01-06-2010, 08:43 PM
Well the point of the whaling thing being illegal is another argument, but I don't think this guy should put his crew nor the crew of the whaling ship in danger.

Folks can come unglued and yell at me all you want. I just don't think any one person should endanger the lives of others for what they personally feel is right or wrong.

- M

Right then....so it's time to change to underline and ditch the highlight? Yep, much nicer......
;):)

On with the show.......

The point of whaling being illegal is just a tiny bit central to the whole thing. When you see protests by Greenpeace et al. you'll notice that, arguably, what they are protesting about is often illegal (eg.dumping toxic waste) or contravenes treaty (eg.exporting coal when the exporting country said it would reduce GH gas), this legitimizes the protest....at least to the protesters.
If whaling wasn't illegal, I'm pretty sure that Sea Shepherd wouldn't have much in the way of crew or financial support for its actions.


I just don't think any one person should endanger the lives of others for what they personally feel is right or wrong.

That probably deserves a, hopefully, more considered thread all on its own. Your statement goes straight to the heart of organized protest......if people protest against a group that is known to be violent is it ever worth the risk?

seanz
01-06-2010, 08:48 PM
You're going off the deep end, seanz. If you think they're "bullying facists" get your government to stand up to them.

It may be "gibberish" to you, but it's only because you either can't, or don't want to accept reality.

All the indignation in the world will never stop enterprise. That will require forceful prejudice.

No, it was gibberish because that was how it was written.

As for "bullying fascists", do you have any knowledge of what/who is behind the whaling industry in Japan?

Nothing is as simple as it seems...........

Krunch
01-06-2010, 09:09 PM
If whaling wasn't illegal, I'm pretty sure that Sea Shepherd wouldn't have much in the way of crew or financial support for its actions.

My guess is that it's not illegal in Japan.

As for one country or another country claiming to "own" the ocean ... well, that's for the lawyers and gunboats to iron out.

TimH
01-06-2010, 09:18 PM
As for one country or another country claiming to "own" the ocean ... well, that's for the lawyers and gunboats to iron out.

They are whaling inside a 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone reaching out from the coastline of the Australian Antarctic Territory.

seanz
01-06-2010, 09:18 PM
My guess is that it's not illegal in Japan.


Really? You guessed that all by yourself?

Captain Blight
01-06-2010, 09:34 PM
My hunch is there is no way to eliminate commercial whaling,I think you're mistaken. Get the US Navy involved, and it would come to a screeching halt.


abhor efforts like Sea Shepherd, PETA and GreenPeace.Why?
If I had my way, people like Bob Barker, and others who finance them would be prosecuted. I'd also prosecute the members and directors of the organizations. I'm against violent 'civil' disobedience.PETA and Greenpeace are notably non-violent.


Where is the UN on this issue?Do a little research. They're involved, alright.
Where is NATO? In my opinion, this is similar to the piracy issue. If individuals (or nations) are flagrantly breaking rules/laws, they should be forcefully sanctioned.Not a National Security issue for anyone-- why waste NATO resources on issues that don't involve NATO waters?


I know I told you to use your head last week. You gonna start doing that, or is that not an option for you right now?

Krunch
01-06-2010, 09:43 PM
PETA and Greenpeace are notably non-violent.

Really? (http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/h/1706-fbi-meet-peta)

Hwyl
01-06-2010, 09:46 PM
Direct action is UTTERLY INEFFECTIVE - as has been amply demonstrated over the last ten years.

There is no point in making stupid gestures and news snippets which play well to the audience in the USA, Canada, Australia, Enn Zed and the UK - none of these people are doing any whaling.

If you want to make meaningful progress you have to persuade - the Japanese, the Norwegians, the Icelanders and any other nation which wants to go whale hunting.

Or go the diplomatic route - google IWC votes and japan.

Direct action has worked plenty of times in the past and you are well aware of it.

ChaseKenyon
01-06-2010, 10:28 PM
Watch the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Brw6JN0lQXY&feature=related) carefully. Up to about 0:55 the trimaran is moving very slowly if at all; at 0:56 there's a large amount of prop wash and it moves forward quite abruptly, NOT in reverse.. The collision occurs at about 1:02.

I stronly disagree Keith.

Ihave been on a US ship DDG6 when it was T-boned at the bow quater by a Korean war DD run by the Italian or \Spanish Navy during North Sea NATO opps. I have studied the video you link to on my high res engineering monitor and at frame by frame.

Not only from the change of angle of incedence shown by the cangining inteesect angle of the mast/boom stays in the Japanese vidio show that the Japanese ship changed course to hit the ABY . this is shown when the bow wave surge on the whaler diminishes as the colllision becomes more likely. jall the while the slight wake from the ABY stays absolutely straight.The ABY did not shange course the whaler did.

back to your video Keith. what you are calling prop wash starts at the outrigers specifically. In the many frames at :54 you can see the "wash is generated by sideways movement of the outriggers. What wash ther was after that was cased by the ABY being dragged up to the whalers speed.

the DDG6 collision I mentioned we were doing about 20 knots the "spanierd was doing about 10 and turned unexpectedly into our port bow quarter, just on the end of the sub cutter "hurricane" bow. we dragged the DD almost a 1/4 of a mile before we could stop and start to get lines over to sop her from sinking. the Wash behind her from dragging her sideways came up to the O2 level at first, WE stoped got lines on her to stop her from sinking and then had to have two ocean tugs sling lines under her bow to keep her afloat hwile a thierd towed her back to ScapaFlow.

The ABY had the right of way was not moving, and the whaler did turn into her to cause a collision. pProbably hopeing to scare the ABY but not realizing her engines were not fully fired up. High speed diesels like the ABY ones are not the Run 24/7 7 months at a time kind the Japanese whaler was used to. Bad call bad form and lack of knowledge along with his frustration with the ABY led to the whaler skipper commiting an act of war to sink (not piracy which is capture and or raid) on the high seas. Worse still if it is in Australian territorial waters or the water of the coalition gov't of Antartica it is an act of war on those entities. ask the guys here who have studied maritime law. It is a bit different than land law and the things you can not gfet a way with are actually quite well defined.

Nicholas Carey
01-06-2010, 10:40 PM
I've now looked at it several times...the small craft attacked the larger...period
Really? What I saw was the tri dead in the water. I saw the japanese vessel turning hard at speed towards the tri -- the japanese vessel had a good 10 degrees of heel, so it was moving fast with a lot of rudder.

TimH
01-06-2010, 11:05 PM
Its a brand new boat to Sea Sheperds. er...shall I say was. Mayby an amatuer at the helm?

ChaseKenyon
01-06-2010, 11:15 PM
Japanese Whalers Fail in Bid to Strike the Flag

http://www.seashepherd.org/images/stories/news/news_091130_1_2_EC_0175769.jpgDutch Transport Minister Tineke Huizinga has rejected a Japanese government complaint and demand to remove the Dutch flag from the Sea Shepherd ship Steve Irwin.
The Japanese Prime Minster brought the matter to the attention of Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende a month ago when Balkenende was on a visit to Japan. Balkenende stressed then that the Netherlands does not agree with the Japanese views on whaling.
Under pressure from the Japanese government however, the Dutch foreign Ministry gave indications that they would seek to change the legislation to allow the Dutch government to remove the Dutch flag from the Steve Irwin despite the fact that no charges had been laid against the Steve Irwin or Sea Shepherd by the Dutch, Japanese, or Australian governments in connection with Sea Shepherd efforts to end illegal Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
Research by the Dutch shipping inspectorate showed both sides had broken international sea rules, the minister said. The Japanese government refused to cooperate with the Dutch shipping inspectorate and therefore a complete investigation into the incidents in the Southern Ocean was not possible.






:):):):)

ChaseKenyon
01-06-2010, 11:22 PM
From Capt. Ian MAC

I encourage folk to participate in the other thread as it was started first. I looked at three different UTubes. One makes it appear that Shonan Maru No.2 turned into the tri. One taken from above shows radical acceleration after impact of the tri's port hull with turbulence on the sterns that might be simply Ady Gil being dragged and might be the motors accelerating in an attempt to shere off or an attempt to simply accelerate. I did not see a video of Ady Gil moving ahead of Shonan before what appears to be impact.

I also saw the water cannon spraying not just prior to impact by aggressivly to prevent Ady Gil's crew from protecting themselves after impact.

Throughout Shonan was the overtaking vessel changing it's course to strike while Ady Gil held her course.


That by itself is considered under maritime law to be an act of agression intent to sink or make a vessel to require abandonment.

Bottom line is it is an act of war. NOt a simple breaking of maritime law.

that Japanese by having one skipper loose his cool have taken the conflict to the highest diplomatic level possible "direct act of war". Not a skirmish like many of our NATO ops in the early 70s were written off as by all parties, even if those of us involved did not survive.

Whole different level as to international diplomatic law, treaties and custom. Chuck would say much the same I feel.

ChaseKenyon
01-06-2010, 11:32 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clI0kmTWKYs

who started the violence by threatening it shooting?

who responded violently in justifiable smoke/stink bomb launch?

who retailated by throwring incendiary grenades?

Who actually started firing gunshots?


I applaude the sea sheps for even going back there.

The thing about the collision everyone or most seem to miss in the videos is the length of the ABY. If you look at the vids of the boat as the EarthRAce you get an idea of the fact that it is twice as long as you think on the bow side of the cockpit/cabin.
It was hit and dragged intentionally by the Japanese skipper and then water cannoned after that in an attempt to guarantee that it sank and would not bother them again.

Spend a few hours on research of the Whaling wars and Nat GEo and others feature articles and vids of it going back ten years.

ChaseKenyon
01-06-2010, 11:37 PM
Have a look at it from a different angle. The camera on board the Japanese whaling ship is moving with the ship and gives a distorted view. Coincidence that this happened previously in 1994 with the same whaling ship? Lloyds listed the collision as being the fault of the Japanese whaling ship.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjlCGR_ggbw&feature=related

TimH
01-06-2010, 11:41 PM
They will be stopped. I think this will cause a lot of outrage.

Nicholas Carey
01-07-2010, 12:37 AM
Just to be picayune about things, let's take a look at Our Friend -- 72 COLREGS -- shall we?
Rule 15
When two power-driven vessels are crossing so as to involve risk of collision, the vessel which has the other on her own starboard side shall keep out of the way and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid crossing ahead of the other vessel.It is apparent from both videos (shot from BOB BARKER and SHONAN MARU 2 respectively), that by Rule 15, ADY GIL was clearly the stand-on vessel here and SHONAN MARU 2 the give-way vessel. Moreover, it is apparent from the BOB BARKER video that she intentionally turned towards ADY GIL and attempted to cross ahead of ADY GIL, another violation of Rule 15. Assuming, of course, that the collision was unintentional :rolleyes:

I think whoever insures SHONAN MARU 2 will be buying Paul Watson a hot new oceangoing trimaran.

Lucky Luke
01-07-2010, 12:56 AM
They will be stopped. I think this will cause a lot of outrage.

I don't think so!!!

Just look at how many, in this post and the other one and you will see that, even there at this forum f boat and sea lovers, and although ALL are against whaling, Sea Sheperd's and Watson's way of action is widely disapproved.

I too hate whaling, by whichever nation, but the way these guys act is reprehensible.

In this last action:

- there is no such thing as substantial "suction" at the level of the bow of a ship

- Crew of this boat, as many times Sea Sheperd's crews before, INTENTIONALLY and precisely put themselves right in front of the bows (always coming from Starboard, hahahaha!) in order to pretend that the whaler intentionally rammed them. Lawyer-style nitty-gritty discussion about the angle of the camera, the whaler steering towards them (try and change course on a ship this size: it's not a jet-ski!) and all that blah blah is nonsense: that boat accelerated at the last moment to position itself right in front of the whaler, solely with the aim of getting publicity, and not for fouling the whaler's prop" as they had not even launched their "prop-fouling" line! They even precisely "offered" their long, unmanned bow to the steel bow of the whaler.
- Watson, who is not far from a sect leader, is reprehensible, personally, in risking the lives of "his" crew. By the fact that he exhorts them to pursue such dangerous and deliberate action is not far from criminal. Mind that it may become criminal one day....!!! Stop saying that the are all adults and know what they do: some have even done mass suicide with wives and kids in the hands of such fanatics!

Stop whaling, but stop the S.S. (Sea Sheperds???) style action too!
Express your disagreement with their methods, and Watson's personal way of leading men and women, in forums like this, as you have done. Write to CNN and moreover to national Geographic (which I am going to do right after), but also say what you think of their pretended "research" to any Japanese you meet, not aggressively - which is inefficient - but calmly and respectfully but still firmly! There are plenty Japanese in the States. I meet lots here too, and I can tell you: they to not like their Nation to be looked down, and actually most are aware of this disguise and not proud of it.

"Direct action", boycott, military action, "enforcement"...: all that just and only reinforces animosity, and is sure losing.

S.S. will lose in the end, not win (excepted in being given millions of $$$). But the whalers have got to lose too: by each one's individual action.

Start NOW!

Chip-skiff
01-07-2010, 12:59 AM
Looks as if the Japanese vessel altered course to ram the trimaran, and I can't think of any excuse for firing the water cannon after the collision.

Naturally the Japanese are mad about being opposed, but I think they deserve it.

Research, my arse—

Nicholas Carey
01-07-2010, 12:59 AM
Its a brand new boat to Sea Sheperds. er...shall I say was. Mayby an amatuer at the helm?It would seem that the japanese were using LRAD acoustic weapons againt ADY GIL. Listen to the audio from the japanese video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dXCR9LX-Kc

Compare that sound to this video shot during last fall's G20 summit in Pittsburgh, when the police deployed LRAD against protestors:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSMyY3_dmrM

LRAD's effects upon its targets include pain, nausea, disorientation and temporary disruption of vision. That may be why ADY GIL had come to nearly a complete stop -- a little hard to drive if you're puking, disoriented and near-blind.

A little googling and youtubing suggests that the japanese also recently deployed LRAD against a Sea Shepherd helo as well as against other Sea Shepherd vessels.

TimH
01-07-2010, 01:05 AM
- Watson, who is not far from a sect leader, is reprehensible, personally, in risking the lives of "his" crew. By the fact that he exhorts them to pursue such dangerous and deliberate action is not far from criminal. Mind that it may become criminal one day....!!! Stop saying that the are all adults and know what they do: some have even done mass suicide with wives and kids in the hands of such fanatics!

Stop whaling, but stop the S.S. (Sea Sheperds???) style action too!
Express your disagreement with their methods

Greenpeace used to be active. Now they are nothing but donation takers.

I agree with the Sea Sheperds. Sorry.

The Bigfella
01-07-2010, 01:32 AM
Having been involved in a bit of direct action environmental stuff in my youth, I may well have been there if this was 35 years ago.... but it isn't and I'm not... so...

I, for one, have had a gutful of the Japanese attitude to this. I'm happy to do what I did in relation to French products after they (the French Govt) killed the Portugese photographer on July 11 1985 in Auckland Harbour when they placed bombs on the Rainbow Warrior. Avoid buying Japanese products where possible.

As to the water cannon. You guys are being a bit harsh on that bloke. The seaman was doing as he'd been told - hosing them - but as soon as he saw the damage you can see he aimed away. Give the bloke a posy of flowers for not following orders.

Typhoon
01-07-2010, 03:05 AM
I find it interesting that other nations can fish certain species to extinction, but whales are somehow more special and more of an outrage is created over it?
Not that running anything to extinction is good in any way, just don't understand the double standards.
The Protester boat was clearly accelerating hard when the collision occured, I have seen footage from three angles including front on. Anyone who can't see significant propwash and wake formation off that hull has blinkers on. Hard astern on teh protest boat would've avoided the collision, or turned it into a light graze at worst.
The large Japanese vessel did not turn hard to starboard, there was a significant swell running. I wonder if some here have even been offshore....
Anyone who puts a small vessel like that in close quarters with a much larger vessel in the Southern ocean and expects it to be able to change course and speed like a dinghy should be charged with reckless navigation and perhaps even attempted manslaughter.
Personally, I think all the protesters should go and get jobs and start contributing something useful to the world. Perhaps even spend some of their OWN money and try to stop the whaling legally. But hey, I bet they all drive Japanese built hybrids!
The protesters are just as guilty in this case, as they always are and always will be.
Frankly, it is a disgusting display of very poor seamanship.

Regards, Andrew.

bobbys
01-07-2010, 03:09 AM
This has not been brought up but the Japanese were within there rights as the Ady Gil was flying the jolly Rodger.{ painted on the side, Well at least looked like it}

So it identified itself as a Pirate ship on the high seas..

The Jolly Roger is the name given to any of various flags (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag) flown to identify a ship's crew as pirates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jolly_Roger#cite_note-0) The flag most usually identified as the Jolly Roger today is the skull and crossbones, being a flag consisting of a skull (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull) above two long bones (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone) set in an x-mark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_mark) arrangement on a black field. This design was used by four pirates, captains Edward England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_England), John Taylor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Taylor_%28pirate%29), Sam Bellamy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Bellamy) and John Martel.[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] Some Jolly Roger flags also include an hourglass (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hourglass), representing that the victims' time to surrender was running out. Despite its prominence in popular culture, plain black flags were often employed by most pirates in the 17th-18th century.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jolly_Roger#cite_note-1) Historically, the flag was flown to frighten pirates' victims into surrendering without a fight, since it conveyed the message that the attackers were outlaws who would not consider themselves bound by the usual rules of engagement—and might, therefore, slaughter those they defeated (since captured pirates were usually hanged, they didn't have much to gain by asking quarter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_quarter) if defeated). .

Faced with piracy on the high seas by a ship flying or painted with the Jolly Rodger identified as an outlaw ship sailing under no known nation and sailing directly into there path to intercept the Japanese were withen there rights to defend there ship or risk death with no Quarter given if boarded..

It would be inmaterial if the Japenese ship was Killing whales, Aborting babies onboard or dispensing spent nuclear rods into the ocean , The Ady Gil is not a known court dispending justice willy nilly reconized by world courts..

By flying the Jolly Rodger its a crimminal enterprize...

I sure hope Keith or Ian do not read this post.:D

Lucky Luke
01-07-2010, 03:37 AM
This has not been brought up but the Japanese were within there rights as the Ady Gil was flying the jolly Rodger.{ painted on the side, Well at least looked like it}

So it identified itself as a Pirate ship on the high seas..


Sorry, but the Sea Sheperds are not flying the Jolly Roger, but their logo (clearly indicating their methods by an intentional resemblance, though) :

http://thisiswhitey.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/sea-shepherd2.jpg

Peter Malcolm Jardine
01-07-2010, 04:39 AM
I think Paul Watson is a crazy idiot, that says really stupid things on occasion that do nothing to endear him to the audience that COULD be sympathetic.

After viewing the video, the Japanese ship quite obviously hit the Ady Gill with some forethought. They should be held accountable.

The international community should be policing the Japanese whaling fleet. If the world cared about this, they would stop it. I would hasten to say that there is other countries 'poaching' whales. The Japanese are one of the countries that are really good at stripping the ocean of anything that swims, anywhere they like.

purri
01-07-2010, 04:46 AM
FWIW,
Had a convo with an OOOOOOOOOOOOOld mate today. His take from longtaim is that the "skipper" holes up with his GF and lets the crew "do as they will".

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
01-07-2010, 05:24 AM
Direct action has worked plenty of times in the past and you are well aware of it.

Only when the action is capable of influencing the right people.

In this case? - Not the proverbial snowball's chance - and wishful thinking will not make it otherwise.

skuthorp
01-07-2010, 06:12 AM
Publicity and political pressure may succeed and this incdent is publicity gold. It doesn't matter if you agree or not, it get's it talked about and stirrs reluctant pollies to make comment. A court case would be better publicity, no matter who wins. I gather that the Japanese regard a whaling ban as the thin edge of the wedge for other ocean species. Fishing, especially for krill, poses a far greater threat to whales and the Japanese harvest krill too.
The basic problem really though is overpopulation, of humans.

seanz
01-07-2010, 06:16 AM
FWIW,
Had a convo with an OOOOOOOOOOOOOld mate today. His take from longtaim is that the "skipper" holes up with his GF and lets the crew "do as they will".

The Farley Mowat was obviously a bit of a 'Love Boat', young mixed crew and a sauna.
;):D

Duncan Gibbs
01-07-2010, 06:41 AM
The international community should be policing the Japanese whaling fleet. If the world cared about this, they would stop it. I would hasten to say that there is other countries 'poaching' whales. The Japanese are one of the countries that are really good at stripping the ocean of anything that swims, anywhere they like.

Southern blue-fin tuna in particular: They are environmental vandals and their ships should be sunk as they leave port. I recommend the Sea Shepherds use these:

http://www.military.cz/usa/navy/weapons/torpedo/torpedo.jpg

The Japanese whaling fleet deserve every bit of grief Watson and his crews can throw at it. I have NO time for such a motley armada.

PeterSibley
01-07-2010, 06:44 AM
The Japanese Self Defence Force would probably love the exercise Dunc , 3 weeks ?

Duncan Gibbs
01-07-2010, 06:47 AM
Limpet mines set by divers in port then. ;)

PeterSibley
01-07-2010, 07:05 AM
More like it ..plausible deniabilty .

Pugwash
01-07-2010, 07:12 AM
Limpet mines set by divers in port then. ;)

I would have thought a trained dolphin would be more appropriate.

:)

Bill Lowe
01-07-2010, 07:49 AM
Fishermen rape the sea, realators rape the land, boatbuilders have raped the forests and we continue to overpopulate the earth to the point of killing off all competing species.

Keith Wilson
01-07-2010, 07:49 AM
I sure hope Keith or Ian do not read this post.Awww c'mon, let me agree with you occasionally. I have no sympathy with whaling, but only marginally more with the Sea Shepherds. If I though their tactics might work, maybe, but no. It seems very clear to me from the video that the trimaran was accelerating hard (forward) just before the collision. I can't tell if the whaler turned toward the Ady Gill or not - there was a quite bit of sea, and it was moving around a lot.

George.
01-07-2010, 07:51 AM
Watch both videos, and use the moves of the bow water cannon to establish the timing. You'll notice:

1) The Jap looks set to pass ahead of the Shepherds, and the Shepherds are idling. Then the Jap suddenly turns to starboard and changes to a collision course.

2) The Shepherds, thinking they are about to be rammed amidships and drowned, accelerate forward to try to clear the Jap's bow.

3) But the Jap just meant to give them a scare, so he turns back to port at the last minute - just as the Shepherds are accelerating.

The Japanese boat initiated the maneuvering that led to the collision, and performed two reckless changes of course. They wanted a close call more than the Shepherds did, and they got more than they bargained for.

I have been sailing when a large ship suddenly changed course and headed straight for us. In every case, my (correct) instinct was to gun the engine and pass in front. If you stand on you'll be rammed, and turning or reversing takes far more time than going ahead.

As for the effect it has: we now have a three-page thread which we didn't before, arguing about whaling.

As for the legality: Japan is in violation of her international treaty obligations. Other than that, whaling in international waters is legal, and there is no enforcement mechanism anyway. Interfering with whalers in international waters is also legal, as long as you approach from starboard, and there is no treaty or enforcement mechanism covering that either. So it's at best a draw. :D

LeeG
01-07-2010, 08:01 AM
note to self, experimental carbon fiber boat not built for collisions.

Keith Wilson
01-07-2010, 08:04 AM
1) The Jap looks set to pass ahead of the Shepherds, and the Shepherds are idling. Then the Jap suddenly turns to starboard and changes to a collision course.
2) The Shepherds, thinking they are about to be rammed amidships and drowned, accelerate forward to try to clear the Jap's bow.
3) But the Jap just meant to give them a scare, so he turns back to port at the last minute - just as the Shepherds are accelerating.That's certainly plausible - give them a scare or douse 'em with water or both. It's hard to see the course changes of the whaler because of the swell, but it makes sense. Playing chicken with boats in the southern ocean. :rolleyes:

LeeG
01-07-2010, 08:16 AM
it looks like there would have been a collision even if the trimaran hadn't accelerated forward 20' with only a few feet lateral movement. That's a hell of a statement. "we're so rich we can waste a boat".

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
01-07-2010, 08:21 AM
....That's a hell of a statement. "we're so rich we can waste a boat".

And its crew.

Chris Coose
01-07-2010, 08:33 AM
I'd say this is an act of war by both parties, judging by the response (or lack of by not giving aid) of the Japanes after the collision.

So does this go before an international tribunal? Where maybe they will consider the whaling question?
Oh right! That was done a long time ago.

The Japanese whaling industry sucks and should be challenged and the Sea Shepard guys suck for their dramatic acts (kick me hard please) that cause violence and potential injury and loss of life.

I wonder how many more whales'd be taken if it weren't for outfits like Sea Shepard, and for that I tip my hat to them. It is a paradox.

Ian McColgin
01-07-2010, 09:04 AM
Sea Shepherd is folk who broke off from Greenpeace when the latter was moving away from hazardous ocean confrontation and following the righteous advice of many googoo liberals and preachy conservatives (at least mouthing tactical advice) to concentrate on land based non-physically dangerous or damaging methods.

You'll note that I'm not Sea Shepherd myself. I'll volunteer what some might guess that I support Greenpeace before saying:

Sea Shepherd rightly views it's ability to bring high drama to the high seas as essential to keeping the pressure up. Were the Japanese (and Norwegians and Icelanders and (I think still but maybe wrong) Russians able to ply their slaughters in quiet obscurity, it would just be some cetacian huggers who cared.

TimH
01-07-2010, 11:02 AM
Japan's media broke its tradition of largely ignoring the country's annual "scientific" whaling expeditions. TV networks showed video footage of the collision taken from aboard the Shonan Maru, while two newspapers carried front-page photographs of the incident.

New reports of the clash suggested the anti-whaling activists had been to blame. "Sea Shepherd boat veers into path of patrol ship," ran the headline on the website of the Yomiuri Shimbun (http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/), Japan's biggest-selling newspaper.

Australian news coverage was less sympathetic towards the whalers.

The Age newspaper (http://www.theage.com.au/) called on the government to intervene in the dispute. "It is time the Australian government stepped up its responses to a situation that is now intolerable. It is no longer sufficient to advise caution on both sides," it said.

The Australian prime minister, Kevin Rudd, has threatened to take legal action to stop the whale hunts, which take place in Antarctic territories claimed by Australia but not recognised by Japan.

But environmental campaigners accused Rudd of quietly reneging on threats to take Japan to the International Court of Justice amid concerns that it could damage expanding trade and security ties between Tokyo and Canberra.

Gillard insisted that the government remained committed to ending the hunts through diplomatic or legal means.

"On the issue of commercial whaling, the government's position is this: we continue to forcefully put our position to the Japanese government and we continue to forcefully put that in a proper and legal way.

"If ultimately, the matter about whaling cannot be resolved diplomatically, then we reserve our rights to initiate international legal action."

Bob Brown, the leader of Australia's Greens, called on the government to replace the US$1.8m Ady Gil and send the bill to Tokyo. "This is a crass act of violence by the Japanese whaling fleet backed up by the Japanese government," he said.

link (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/07/sea-shepherd-japanese-whaling-ship)

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 11:10 AM
Having been involved in a bit of direct action environmental stuff in my youth, I may well have been there if this was 35 years ago.... but it isn't and I'm not... so...

I, for one, have had a gutful of the Japanese attitude to this. I'm happy to do what I did in relation to French products after they (the French Govt) killed the Portugese photographer on July 11 1985 in Auckland Harbour when they placed bombs on the Rainbow Warrior. Avoid buying Japanese products where possible.

As to the water cannon. You guys are being a bit harsh on that bloke. The seaman was doing as he'd been told - hosing them - but as soon as he saw the damage you can see he aimed away. Give the bloke a posy of flowers for not following orders.

THANK-YOU IAN!!! I saw the same thing but kept my mouth shut because I've been shouted down too many times by the self-righteous on this forum...

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 11:14 AM
Greenpeace used to be active. Now they are nothing but donation takers.

I agree with the Sea Sheperds. Sorry.

this one is worth saving for the next time someone tells me that breaking the law is always wrong no matter what

TimH
01-07-2010, 11:19 AM
Nobody ever said breaking the law is always wrong. Our country is based upon breaking the law (British laws).

The whales belong to all of us.
In essence the Japanese are stealing from all of us.

Asians amaze me that they are in general extremely intelligent but insist on raping the planet like they do.

ahp
01-07-2010, 11:22 AM
Sea Shepherd went looking for trouble and found it. Boo hoo.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 11:25 AM
Do those rooster tails from the ugly boat mean it was reversing...?

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 11:27 AM
Southern blue-fin tuna in particular: They are environmental vandals and their ships should be sunk as they leave port. I recommend the Sea Shepherds use these:

http://www.military.cz/usa/navy/weapons/torpedo/torpedo.jpg

The Japanese whaling fleet deserve every bit of grief Watson and his crews can throw at it. I have NO time for such a motley armada.

according to some here, the smoke and "wake" shown in this picture indicate that the torpedo is about to hit the ship, fins first...

Ian McColgin
01-07-2010, 11:43 AM
There are many positions possible on this matter:

1. Whale stock are not declining and besides whaling is right.

2. Some scientific gain comes from turning whales into protien for the Japanese and for pets.

3. This whaling is wrong and we should apply diplomancy, consumer action, and perhaps circle up singing KumBayAh.

4. This whaling is so wrong that we should take serious physical risks by interposing our own bodies to protect the whales and by crippling whaling efforts by damaging their equipment. And doing so with great publicity helps plan 3.

5. Whaling is so very wrong that we should sink and kill whalers.

Unlike the analogous position on global warming, we do not have (as yet) any articulated support for positions 1, 2, or 5.

I don't see how off point and gratuitously insulting posts like #121 advance any of these five points or any other point.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 11:48 AM
why don't you start a thread about whale killing and try to help this one with discussions about unlawful acts and ship ramming

Ian McColgin
01-07-2010, 12:01 PM
My dear Phillip, I started one thread which I came to see and acknowledged was really on this topic, which had been started earlier. My remarks are on topic, which is by no means limited to whether either vessel was engaged in unlawful ramming. What's obviously off-topic is to take one person's rather extreme position as having any relevance to a totally different point. Had you any actual ability to analyze the videos, you could have commented on the wakes yourself. You chose not.

Just to further the actual topic a little, intent matters at least a little in these matters. Sea Shepherd has engaged in sabotage and at least ship bumping, not to mention that older effort - was it Sea Shepherd or the last dangerous Greenpeace? - with the reinforced concreted bow. When these guys plan to ram, they are more rational than to do so in a boat so fantastically unsuited as that tri. The obvious purpose here was to harrass without physical contact. The actual ramming by the Japanese was a combination of the Japanese aggressive response coupled with some bad judgement error at the tri's helm.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 12:26 PM
My dear Phillip, I started one thread which I came to see and acknowledged was really on this topic, which had been started earlier. My remarks are on topic, which is by no means limited to whether either vessel was engaged in unlawful ramming. What's obviously off-topic is to take one person's rather extreme position as having any relevance to a totally different point. Had you any actual ability to analyze the videos, you could have commented on the wakes yourself. You chose not.

Just to further the actual topic a little, intent matters at least a little in these matters. Sea Shepherd has engaged in sabotage and at least ship bumping, not to mention that older effort - was it Sea Shepherd or the last dangerous Greenpeace? - with the reinforced concreted bow. When these guys plan to ram, they are more rational than to do so in a boat so fantastically unsuited as that tri. The obvious purpose here was to harrass without physical contact. The actual ramming by the Japanese was a combination of the Japanese aggressive response coupled with some bad judgement error at the tri's helm.

I see you have not read all my posts...I did address the obvious acceleration of the ugly boat...if you think the evidence of acceleration is photo shopped or something does not mean you are right...you might try to discuss why those roostertails at the stern of the ugly boat should be ignored and that a large whaling ship can turn into a small boat so quickly that they couldn't escape with reversing (example shown at end of vedio which indicates even without the roostertails that the ugly boat chose not to manuver to avoid collision and therefore caused it when the larger ship would have much difficulty changing direction...I thought 'someone' knew about boats and ships...or do you think others do not and therefore can have the sea-wool pulled over their eyes?

LeeG
01-07-2010, 12:31 PM
Phillip, I think you need to move some firewood around as you are lashing out inappropriately.

Rich VanValkenburg
01-07-2010, 12:37 PM
This reminds me of the old story '20,000 Leagues Under the Sea' where Capt Nemo intended to stop war by destroying as many warships as he could. A noble venture but a waste of time and lives. The Japanese will never stop whaling. The Japanese will never honor an international court ruling on such. The only way to stop harvesting the oceans to species extinction is to think as one mind, and we never will.

I suspect the next step for Sea Shepherds is a submarine with live torpedoes. I also suspect Paul Watson will somehow let his crew retaliate in kind.

TimH
01-07-2010, 12:38 PM
We could painstakingly disect the videos frame by frame for our friend Phillip.
I believe it would be a waste of time.

Like Ian said, if the Sea Sheperds where intending to ram the Japanese ship they wouldnt do it with their brand new 2 million dollar carbon fiber boat.
Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows which boat would come out on top.
From the second video its is blatantly clear that the Japanese boat drastically altered course to ram the smaller boat.
The bat boat was sitting there stationary until just before impact. After the impact the bat boat was moving in reverse.

switters
01-07-2010, 12:38 PM
Mr. Allen,

Turn the internet off, and go do something else for a while. look at boat plans, or better yet, go build one. Build a small one just for practice. It was funny when you were arguing with Joe (to me anyway) but sad. Then you started in on LJ and a few others and now you are starting with Ian. You are rude in the least and your wit needs several passes over the water stone. I don't remember it being this way a year ago. Get a new hobby, arguing on a wooden boat forum does not suit you well.

Good day,

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 12:38 PM
Phillip, I think you need to move some firewood around as you are lashing out inappropriately.

how is that inappropriate? details if you will...

TimH
01-07-2010, 12:41 PM
how is that inappropriate? details if you will...

Personal attacks on me and Ian for starters.

Go out and play with your horse or something. fresh air will do you some good.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 12:44 PM
I've watched the vedio at least ten times by now...I see the small craft accelerate into the side of the ship...if I have that wrong I would appreciate a VERY good explaination of how that is wrong...roostertails=acceleration...if that is wrong please help me to se how roostertails indicate reversing?

as to the other vedio showing the ship looking like it's going to hit the ugly boat broad side...is it not obvious that a vector drawn along the path of the ship shows it missing...jis it not obvious that the pamera is at a considerable angle to that vector to cause the distortion in view...
?
did I ever say that I hate...HATE being lied to?

I'm gonna watch it yet again now...

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 12:45 PM
Personal attacks on me and Ian for starters.

Go out and play with your horse or something. fresh air will do you some good.

alright, I'll try not to attack anyone on a personal level...

explain the roostertails on the ugly boat please?

Ian McColgin
01-07-2010, 12:52 PM
Unlike Phillip, I did not watch one video ten times. I watched three differend videos from three different perspectives repeating the moments before the actual collision back and forth. I even mentioned the difficulties of perspective and certainty. On review, I still see no acceleration. I did not mention before, but like others I find the water cannon's aim helpful, as well as the bow wave of the tri and the fact that at no time in the incident does the tri move ahead in reference to the whaling ship.

Also unlike Phillip, I do not have such absolute certainty that I'd foreclose a more comprehensive analysis. I recognize that camera angles can be misleading. It helps my confidence in my analysis that three different cameras have led me to the same conclusion but it remains at least a little uncertain.

Given the lawless nature of these high seas encounters, we are unlikely to get a truely objective scientific analysis and there will always be room for our sympathies to cloud our judgement.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 12:52 PM
okay...I went back and edited some personal stuff out of some of my more recent posts...if anyone gets his panties in a wad over more of them he'll need to bring them to my attention individually...then I'll consider editing them

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 12:55 PM
In reverse....

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/picsonline/AdyGil.jpg


really?

Ian...do you see no evidence of acceleration still?

Pugwash
01-07-2010, 12:56 PM
http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/251888

:)

TimH
01-07-2010, 12:57 PM
explain the roostertails on the ugly boat please?

Like LeeG explained to you above. Boats need headway to have steerage.
The tri was sitting stationary up until the last second.
Tri driver sees Japanese ship about to hit them square amidships.
Tri driver hits throttle to evade eminent collision.

A little to late.

A few seconds before the collision the whaler was on an entirely different course not even close to intersecting the tri.

TimH
01-07-2010, 12:59 PM
If the tri expected an impact those people would not have been standing up on the bow. They would have been strapped in or at leasst in the cockpit with something to hold on to.

Or do you think they were planning on sacrificing a few people along with the boat?

bobbys
01-07-2010, 01:03 PM
how is that inappropriate? details if you will....

Please check the Rush and Cheney threads to find reasonable and Appropriate responses.

Trawlercap
01-07-2010, 01:04 PM
There is a crash bulkhead in the carbon boat, last report was they will be repairing it.

I have dealt with harassment at sea by well intentioned but sorely misguided greenpeace operations. The #1 goal of this activity is to get on the 5 O Clock news. And they will be looking like the good guys taking on the bad guys. They are media experts. They have huge budgets to outfit their circus. What does it cost to stream video from out at sea?
They practice insane seamanship, trying to interfere and stop operations of the bigger vessel. The operators I witnessed were just horrible seaman.
This incident will pay huge dividends in the way of media coverage and funds raised. It is not hard to imagine, the Sea Shepard folks are giving high fives all around for this one. Believe me, like it has been said, they are glory hogs, and media hounds, they will do what ever it takes to get their msg. out, and the funds rolling in. Follow the money....watch how the funds come in and the story plays out. To quote another guy.....

Personally I think the Japanese are full of s**t when it comes to "whale research" -( why is it SO important ?) and the Sea Shepherd guys are fanatical maniacs...... so war it is !!

Glad I'm not anywhere near them !

The Bigfella
01-07-2010, 01:05 PM
Are you sure you are seeing roostertails? That is a twin engined boat. Count the roostertails.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 01:05 PM
If the tri expected an impact those people would not have been standing up on the bow. They would have been strapped in or at leasst in the cockpit with something to hold on to.

Or do you think they were planning on sacrificing a few people along with the boat?

I think they were planning on a "bump" and the bowmen were calling distances...the skipper, fearing a miss gave it too much gas (deisel) and over did it

wrong again about manuver...a straight reverse was all that was needed...playing chicken with a train, misjudging the speed or what have you and getting hit does not place responsibility on the train...your logic is faulty

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 01:07 PM
Are you sure you are seeing roostertails? That is a twin engined boat. Count the roostertails.

I see three though one is partial obscured

I looked it upl...you were right...2 engines...45 knots capable

http://plumbot.com/ady-gil.html

Trawlercap
01-07-2010, 01:11 PM
Like LeeG explained to you above. Boats need headway to have steerage.
The tri was sitting stationary up until the last second.
Tri driver sees Japanese ship about to hit them square amidships.
Tri driver hits throttle to evade eminent collision.

A little to late.

A few seconds before the collision the whaler was on an entirely different course not even close to intersecting the tri.

Look how fast he went in reverse when he wanted to? Maybe just maybe he thought he could go fwd. (the video shot from the ship shows he has prop wash in fwd. the whole time)...so he goes fwd to bash into the ship? He has a kevlar reinforced bow (for ice supposedly) and a crash bulkhead a long ways back. But he miscalculated, easy to do if you are in a frenzy and getting lots of spray all over you.
Maybe the whaler wanted to get close enough to hit them with the spray cannons, those cannons are why the Tri is not alongside harassing them. SO the whaler tries to get close, the tri wants to slam into him (great for media coverage)
This will be pretty interesting to see how it plays out in the courts.


This from the BBC


New Zealand and Australia have said they will investigate a Japanese whaling ship's alleged ramming of a protest boat in Antarctic waters. The whalers and protesters from the Sea Shepherd activist group blame each other for a collision on Wednesday.
No-one was hurt in the incident but New Zealand and Australia called on both sides to avoid activities that could endanger lives.
The activist group said it would continue to harass the whalers.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 01:18 PM
I see from reading that the ugly boat has already killed one fisherman...
also, the hull kept cracking and it may very well have been a good idea to sink it...

TimH
01-07-2010, 01:18 PM
If I were being bombarded by LRAD I might make a misjudgement too.

TimH
01-07-2010, 01:19 PM
I see from reading that the ugly boat has already killed one fisherman...


Fisherman? What do fish have to do with this?

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 01:20 PM
If I were being bombarded by LRAD I might make a misjudgement too.

so, a defensive manuver by the ship to deny the offensive intent by the ugly boat is unfair somehow?

(sounds like the wife beater who claims she made him do it!)

TimH
01-07-2010, 01:33 PM
As they say - all is fair in love and war.

George.
01-07-2010, 01:38 PM
Phillip: I explained why the Shepherd tried to race forward. I would have done the same if there were a ship coming to hit me amidships. The Jap planned to turn to port at the last minute, to scare the bat boat but not hit it. Unfortunately, the bat boat´s attempted evasive maneuver messed up the Jap´s cunning plan.

Watch the fire hose, and watch the wake of the Maru, and you´ll clearly see both maneuvers - the turn to starboard that caused the bat boat to try to pass forward, and the turn to port that resulted in the collision.

LeeG
01-07-2010, 01:40 PM
They practice insane seamanship, trying to interfere and stop operations of the bigger vessel. The operators I witnessed were just horrible seaman.

[/B]

that's the impression I got from a reality show about the Sea Shepherd where a big RIB went out with a crew but without adequate vhf communication or agreed on protocol with the mother ship so they had to send out a helicoptor to find them. That and the personel problems on the ship made it look like it's one step from disaster to their own crew.

LeeG
01-07-2010, 01:52 PM
I think they were planning on a "bump" and the bowmen were calling distances...the skipper, fearing a miss gave it too much gas (deisel) and over did it

wrong again about manuver...a straight reverse was all that was needed...playing chicken with a train, misjudging the speed or what have you and getting hit does not place responsibility on the train...your logic is faulty

the tri was playing chicken but the ship isn't a train, they maneuvered into the tri. To say the carbon fiber boat is planning on a "bump" is unrealistic as it's not designed for "bumping". It's designed for slicing through water. Look at the design difference of a tug compared to this boat. It's designed with light weight in mind. Light weight doesn't mean designed for bumping things. Light weight means speed. Not resistance to bashing. As you can see from the clips the ship is tall and plunging up and down in waves, the deck of that tri isn't designed for 300tons of steel plunging down on it's decks.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 01:56 PM
I agree with your design observations Lee...maybe the skipper has a PhD though...competence may not matter after all

I'm gonna take a break...my fingers are cold enough that I'm having more than my usual trouble comanding them on the key board...

Trawlercap
01-07-2010, 02:28 PM
The Ady Gil, formerly Earthrace, was designed for a successful round-the-world speed powerboat record attempt in 2008. It was acquired by Sea Shepherd last year and renamed after a Hollywood businessman benefactor.

1. The hull is described as a wave-piercing trimaran. It is made out of carbon fibre with a foam core, but has had Kevlar armour added to defend against ice. It is capable of submarining up to 7m (23ft) underwater.

J P
01-07-2010, 02:50 PM
As to the water cannon. You guys are being a bit harsh on that bloke. The seaman was doing as he'd been told - hosing them - but as soon as he saw the damage you can see he aimed away. Give the bloke a posy of flowers for not following orders.

Where do you see any "aiming" on the stern canon? I just see a steady stream that the wrecked boat goes through. Are those water guns even manned?




I've watched the vedio at least ten times by now...I see the small craft accelerate into the side of the ship...if I have that wrong I would appreciate a VERY good explaination of how that is wrong...roostertails=acceleration...if that is wrong please help me to se how roostertails indicate reversing?

as to the other vedio showing the ship looking like it's going to hit the ugly boat broad side...is it not obvious that a vector drawn along the path of the ship shows it missing...jis it not obvious that the pamera is at a considerable angle to that vector to cause the distortion in view...
?
did I ever say that I hate...HATE being lied to?

I'm gonna watch it yet again now...

My emphasis. Watch the other video from the Bob Barker. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rar9zxH1kts&feature=related) [eta: warning, the audio contains some profanity] The small craft does NOT run into the side of the ship, the ship runs over the bow of the small craft.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/picsonline/AdyGil2.jpg


I also suspect the small boat was attempting to clear the ships bow to avoid collision as others have mentioned. In the Barker video (both videos actually) it looks like they accelerate forward just before impact; I'm seeing prop wash and the bow climbing. Misjudgement or malfunction, they were too late. As others have mentioned, I also find it hard to believe there would be a couple people standing on the deck planning on taking a broadside hit from a large ship. I'm sure the SS folks are dedicated to their cause but I doubt suicidal. Reckless for sure. Wreckfull might be a better word.

TimH
01-07-2010, 04:09 PM
In our list of forces working against the Sea Shepherd’s (http://www.ecorazzi.com/2010/01/07/ady-gil-facing-long-odds-for-survival-after-japanese-strike/) desperate struggle to save the foundering Ady Gil, weather was the number one concern.
Unfortunately, it now appears that Mother Nature has claimed the stealth boat.
A poster on a Sea Shepherd forum (http://www.seashepherd.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=6617&page=5) was listening to Captain Paul Watson being interviewed on an Australian morning television show when the bad news was revealed.

“Paul Watson just said on ABC News Breakfast Australia that the Ady Gil has sunk, they (not sure which ship) had been towing her for 6-7 hours towards the French base but the weather picked up, she took on water and sunk. He confirmed that all fuel and oil had been taken off the vessel.”
Earlier, the MV Bob Barker attempted to tow the Ady Gi (http://www.ecorazzi.com/2010/01/07/ady-gil-facing-long-odds-for-survival-after-japanese-strike/)l (http://www.ecorazzi.com/2010/01/07/ady-gil-facing-long-odds-for-survival-after-japanese-strike/) — but quickly discovered that she was taking on too much water when moved. There were hopes that a French vessel with a crane might come to assist, but we’ve no idea if they ever showed up. Either way, it’s an unfortunate end to such a beautiful vessel. In memory, we’ve added some of our favorite pics below.
#gallery-1 { margin: auto; } #gallery-1 .gallery-item { float: left; margin-top: 10px; text-align: center; width: 33%; } #gallery-1 img { border: 2px solid #cfcfcf; } #gallery-1 .gallery-caption { margin-left: 0; } http://www.ecorazzi.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/adygil-150x96.jpg (http://www.ecorazzi.com/2010/01/07/paul-watson-the-ady-gil-has-sunk/adygil-2/) http://www.ecorazzi.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/adygil1-150x96.jpg (http://www.ecorazzi.com/2010/01/07/paul-watson-the-ady-gil-has-sunk/adygil1-2/) http://www.ecorazzi.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/adygil2-150x96.jpg (http://www.ecorazzi.com/2010/01/07/paul-watson-the-ady-gil-has-sunk/adygil2-2/)
http://www.ecorazzi.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/adygil3-150x96.jpg (http://www.ecorazzi.com/2010/01/07/paul-watson-the-ady-gil-has-sunk/adygil3-2/) http://www.ecorazzi.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/adygil4-150x96.jpg (http://www.ecorazzi.com/2010/01/07/paul-watson-the-ady-gil-has-sunk/adygil4-2/) http://www.ecorazzi.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/adygil5-150x96.jpg (http://www.ecorazzi.com/2010/01/07/paul-watson-the-ady-gil-has-sunk/adygil5-2/)

seanz
01-07-2010, 04:48 PM
I agree with your design observations Lee...maybe the skipper has a PhD though...competence may not matter after all

I'm gonna take a break...my fingers are cold enough that I'm having more than my usual trouble comanding them on the key board...

Don't be so impressed by people with Phds, Phillip........it's just a Double Masters.
:D

Oh, and another thing......the formite you are slinging sh!t at.....I don't think he has posted to this thread....:rolleyes:

Ah, protest theater....sunk, not sunk, rescued, under tow, sunk for good.

I'm a bit suprised/puzzled by all of the accusations of poor seamanship....bit like accusing soldiers of poor gun safety because they have to point guns at people.....the plan is to harrass the Japanese into leaving the whales alone......and the small boat circus and the rammings are just part of the plan.

LeeG
01-07-2010, 04:49 PM
what a waste, they could have used a couple RIBs for direct action and saved that thing for marketing

johnw
01-07-2010, 04:59 PM
Where do you see any "aiming" on the stern canon? I just see a steady stream that the wrecked boat goes through. Are those water guns even manned?





My emphasis. Watch the other video from the Bob Barker. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rar9zxH1kts&feature=related) The small craft does NOT run into the side of the ship, the ship runs over the bow of the small craft.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/picsonline/AdyGil2.jpg


I also suspect the small boat was attempting to clear the ships bow to avoid collision as others have mentioned. In the Barker video (both videos actually) it looks like they accelerate forward just before impact; I'm seeing prop wash and the bow climbing. Misjudgement or malfunction, they were too late. As others have mentioned, I also find it hard to believe there would be a couple people standing on the deck planning on taking a broadside hit from a large ship. I'm sure the SS folks are dedicated to their cause but I doubt suicidal. Reckless for sure. Wreckfull might be a better word.
That vid puts it in a different light. At the beginning of the clip, the whaler heels to the outside of the turn as the rudder bites, it turns toward the Batmoboat, and the skipper of that boat is asleep at the switch. If he's trailing a warp, he can't back up without fouling his own prop, so he tries to run ahead. Can't say I care for either skipper's actions, but the whaler was the aggressor here.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 05:04 PM
John, in one of the vedios, the ugly boat was clearly backing up quite fast...if you need the link I'll hunt it up but it after the ship struck that he reversed to avoid the stern of the ship

Have you been on a big ship in rough seas? I have and the tilting to the side happened (a lot) and we were not changing course (40 degree rolls in my case...)

Trawlercap
01-07-2010, 05:32 PM
Editorial

“Whale Wars” escalate
http://divcom.informz.net/divcom-fish/data/images/jfraser.jpgThings are getting ugly in the Southern Ocean.

On Tuesday the Japanese whaler Shonan Maru No. 2 was involved in a collision with a million-dollar, high-speed, high-tech Sea Shepherd Society runabout named the Ady Gil.
(Check out video on our Facebook (http://divcom-fish.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT02ODY0NDQmcD0xJnU9NzYyMzM0NjYyJmxpPTI2Mj A3Njg/index.html) page)
As one might expect, the big steel whaler got the better end of the deal, shearing off the bow of the carbon fiber speed demon, which news accounts described as a “wave-piercing trimaran” capable of speeds in excess of 50 m.p.h.

The whalers were hosing down the Ady Gil with high-pressure water guns when the collision took place. The Sea Shepherds say the Shonan Maru was attempting to sink them.

All six aboard the Ady Gil were transferred to the Bob Barker, another Sea Shepherd Society vessel, and yes, its namesake is the long-time host of "Truth or Consequences" and "The Price is Right," who donated it.

Notwithstanding that six lives could have been needlessly lost, this is a troubling incident, and one that underlines Sea Shepherd leader Paul Watson’s fanatical vision of conservation.

Although Watson supporters look upon him as a force of nature and an uncompromising hero, in fact he is a reckless lawbreaker and saboteur who brags of the whaling ships he’s sunk.

He would be much a more credible figure if he showed the same reverence for human life that he shows for seals and whales.

Instead, he comes off as a terrorist. We’ll give him this much: it’s a label he seems to wear with pride.
Thank you for your time.
Jerry Fraser
Editor & Publisher, National Fisherman
www.nationalfisherman.com (http://www.nationalfisherman.com)


Australia and New Zealand — both opponents of whaling — have maritime safety authority in the region where the Japanese hunt occurs, and they have urged both sides to show restraint in the frigid waters, warning that they are far away from rescue if anything goes wrong. "The government is very concerned at this collision," Australian Environment Minister Peter Garrett said. "We condemn any dangerous or violent activity that takes place in the southern oceans. Safety at sea is an absolute priority in this dangerous and inhospitable ocean area." New Zealand Foreign Minister Murray McCully deplored the clash and urged both sides to "put a greater premium on human life in such a harsh environment." He said would take up the issue with Japanese authorities.

No-one was hurt in the incident but New Zealand and Australia called on both sides to avoid activities that could endanger lives.
The activist group said it would continue to harass the whalers.

My comment about poor seamanship was not based on the fact that their mission is to harass, (and somehow this condones doing stupid maneuvers in front of a big ship bearing down on you?)
It has been my experience, that vessels in the save the earth movement are manned by some pretty slack individuals. They have no use for discipline, and there are a lot of disciplines that are needed to run a tight ship. I have watched everything from in town antics, to anchor and skiff deployment, to bravado at sea that endangered lives.
I got to sit next to a restaurant table full of mal-content crew off from another Rainbow boat. It was an amazing conversation....who needs a Capt.? He is such a jerk, why do we even need a capt?, he's not telling me what to do. Man we were way out at sea, why can I not have my ipod on while on watch? Who does he think he is?

johnw
01-07-2010, 05:33 PM
Doesn't look like the whaler is rolling, Phillip, though he's pitching quite a bit, and the heel happens once, as he starts turning. None of the vids I've seen show him backing up, but it would certainly be worth a try after he'd been hit. I'm at work, so I can't go through all the links posted in this thread. And yes, I've been on a bigger vessel than that in rougher seas.

Can't say streaming a warp to foul someone else's prop strikes me as a good idea. I can understand the frustration with the high-handedness of the Japanese on this issue, but the business of playing chicken with the whalers is bound to put people at risk. I don't have a sound card on the computer, so I haven't heard the commentary. I'm assuming that's how we know they were streaming a warp?

LeeG
01-07-2010, 05:42 PM
My comment about poor seamanship was not based on the fact that their mission is to harass, (and somehow this condones doing stupid maneuvers in front of a big ship bearing down on you?)
It has been my experience, that vessels in the save the earth movement are manned by some pretty slack individuals. They have no use for discipline, and there are a lot of disciplines that are needed to run a tight ship. I have watched everything from in town antics, to anchor and skiff deployment, to bravado at sea that endangered lives.
I got to sit next to a restaurant table full of mal-content crew off from another Rainbow boat. It was an amazing conversation....who needs a Capt.? He is such a jerk, why do we even need a capt?, he's not telling me what to do. Man we were way out at sea, why can I not have my ipod on while on watch? Who does he think he is?

that's the way it came across on the tv show. It didn't seem like everyone was working from the same book. Made me feel itchy "somethin's gonna happen.."

seanz
01-07-2010, 05:45 PM
in
My comment about poor seamanship was not based on the fact that their mission is to harass, (and somehow this condones doing stupid maneuvers in front of a big ship bearing down on you?)
It has been my experience, that vessels in the save the earth movement are manned by some pretty slack individuals. They have no use for discipline, and there are a lot of disciplines that are needed to run a tight ship. I have watched everything from in town antics, to anchor and skiff deployment, to bravado at sea that endangered lives.
I got to sit next to a restaurant table full of mal-content crew off from another Rainbow boat. It was an amazing conversation....who needs a Capt.? He is such a jerk, why do we even need a capt?, he's not telling me what to do. Man we were way out at sea, why can I not have my ipod on while on watch? Who does he think he is?

Well it wouldn't be harrassing if you kept a safe distance at the rear, would it?

Now, what was the average age of this malcontent crew? ;)

J P
01-07-2010, 06:00 PM
I don't have a sound card on the computer, so I haven't heard the commentary. I'm assuming that's how we know they were streaming a warp?

No mention of a warp in the commentary on that video. I should have put a warning in the post. (I'll go back and do that.)

Goes something like, "... fuu-- .... holy shi- ... whoa ... omg ... oh no ... omg ... fu-- ... they hit it? ... yeah, they hit it ... fu-- ...

I'd still like to hear a translation of the japanese video. One of the versions youtube had pretty clear audio.

johnw
01-07-2010, 06:09 PM
So were they streaming a warp or not? If not, why didn't they back up? I would certainly not go to sea with these folks.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 06:11 PM
So were they streaming a warp or not? If not, why didn't they back up? I would certainly not go to sea with these folks.

I don't think they were but couldn't prove it one way or another

if you watch some of the ugly boat's acceleration, I would think a rope behind would show where it was tied to ugly...

johnw
01-07-2010, 06:26 PM
I don't think they were but couldn't prove it one way or another

if you watch some of the ugly boat's acceleration, I would think a rope behind would show where it was tied to ugly...
In that case, the batboat skipper is as inept as the whaler skipper is malign.

LeeG
01-07-2010, 06:26 PM
hey Phillip, you sound like you need someone to play ping pong with

Captain Blight
01-07-2010, 06:38 PM
By flying the Jolly Rodger its a crimminal enterprize...


It's just a piece of cloth, much like any flag.

Captain Blight
01-07-2010, 06:44 PM
As far as the ADY GIL trailing a warp, in This video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dXCR9LX-Kc&feature=related) taken from the deck of the Japanese ship, shows no such thing. I went over this frame-by-frame for about an hour, and I see absolutely no evidence of anything towed. Mind you, this is only 45 seconds of an incident that started I don't know how much previously.

I was appalled to see what seemed to be a sleeping bag washing out of the bow of the ADY GIL. I hope it was unoccupied.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 07:07 PM
we're bouncing around between several different vedios...I wonder if some astute and neurtal person would post those links together

J P
01-07-2010, 07:14 PM
Looks like a warp to me.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/picsonline/AdyGil3.jpg

Screen capture from this video. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMmpGm5Z1ik&feature=related) Allegedly shot just prior to the ramming. Just before this screen shot you can see someone in the stern of the Ady messing around with a wad of something. After this shot they cross the bow of the ship and slow down on the starboard side. Hard to say at that point if there is any thing attached.

ETA: Here's a shot with the person handling the "drogue". It's clearer in the vid.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y279/picsonline/ADyGil4.jpg



There's another video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6MymqeXhl0&feature=related) that shows the Ady zipping around flashing lazers harassing the ship. She really knifes through the water.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 07:18 PM
okay, I see that...I will go back and look at the other vedio again...it should show (maybe they axed it before the Japanese vedio started)

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 07:22 PM
okay, I looked at JP's vedio (new to me) and believe they were trying to disable the Japanese ship

this vedio shows the ugly passing from port to starbord...the impact vedio shows ugly passing from starbord to port...no reason to think the tow was still attached...wouldn't they cut to avoid being jerked backward and possibly damaged when the japanese ship catches the tow?

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 07:23 PM
after a successful disableing of the Japanese ship were the two shepard boats planning on boarding and commiting more crime?

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 07:27 PM
question...assuming yourselves to be in charge of the whaling ship...what would you do?

you may not say something stupid like cut your own throat or give up whaling...assume you are convinced you are legaly whaling...try to take a wide perspective and place yourself in the position of a mightily harrassed skipper but with your own thoughts on how do deal with attack

???

Captain Blight
01-07-2010, 07:32 PM
Okay, I see they were in fact trailing a warp.

Philip, what would I do? Good question. I can definitely say I wouldn't deliberately ram a vessel in the interests of commerce. Sound, light, stinkbombs, water cannon, all non-lethal; no problem here. Rifle fire, rammings, firebombs-- not so much.

Captain Blight
01-07-2010, 07:36 PM
I wonder: It looks as if they succeeded in getting the warp and drogue at least into the path of the Japanese ship. I wonder if the drogue might have fouled her rudder, causing her to veer? Seems like a slim chance of it happening, but ya never know....

htom
01-07-2010, 07:44 PM
I don't see flags, lights, or balls indicating that ABI is a hazard to navigation or that she has a tow.

htom
01-07-2010, 07:45 PM
I wonder: It looks as if they succeeded in getting the warp and drogue at least into the path of the Japanese ship. I wonder if the drogue might have fouled her rudder, causing her to veer? Seems like a slim chance of it happening, but ya never know....

That smells like a karma test to me!

seanz
01-07-2010, 07:48 PM
question...assuming yourselves to be in charge of the whaling ship...what would you do?

you may not say something stupid like cut your own throat or give up whaling...assume you are convinced you are legaly whaling...try to take a wide perspective and place yourself in the position of a mightily harrassed skipper but with your own thoughts on how do deal with attack

???

So, I can't say scuttle her in sight of land and deploy life-boats?
:rolleyes:

Phillip, I don't think this boat is a whaler....it's a picket boat for the fleet.
It's there to harass Sea Shepherd and prevent them from getting to the factory/mother ship.

So what would I really do if I was Captain?
I'd take steps to avoid conflict to protect my crew and ship and inform the relevant authorities......because it's not as if I'm in the wrong.


One more time......the Japanese whalers are fascist thugs and what they are doing is illegal.

LeeG
01-07-2010, 07:57 PM
hey Phillip, what kind of boat is the Ady Gil?

Captain Blight
01-07-2010, 07:58 PM
I'm a little less inclined to side with SS on this one now that I've seen they were trying to actually cripple the japanese ship. Harassment's one thing, but to render a vessel not under command in the Southern Ocean begins to smack of attempted murder.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 07:58 PM
hey phillip, what kind of boat is the ady gil?

ugly

(Perhaps it's a particularly ugly phalus)

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 08:02 PM
Okay, I see they were in fact trailing a warp.

Philip, what would I do? Good question. I can definitely say I wouldn't deliberately ram a vessel in the interests of commerce. Sound, light, stinkbombs, water cannon, all non-lethal; no problem here. Rifle fire, rammings, firebombs-- not so much.

if it is fair to declair that ugly did not mean to accelerate into the path of the ship...it follows that it is fair to say thejapanese part jof the ramming was unintended...same set of rules for both

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 08:05 PM
So, I can't say scuttle her in sight of land and deploy life-boats?
:rolleyes:

Phillip, I don't think this boat is a whaler....it's a picket boat for the fleet.
It's there to harass Sea Shepherd and prevent them from getting to the factory/mother ship.

So what would I really do if I was Captain?
I'd take steps to avoid conflict to protect my crew and ship and inform the relevant authorities......because it's not as if I'm in the wrong.


One more time......the Japanese whalers are fascist thugs and what they are doing is illegal.

you're cheating...wfhat would do...YOU ARE CONVINCED THAT YOU ARE LEGALALLY FISHING FOR WFHALES...NO CHEATING!
I'll answer the same question in a bit...it's not a trap, really

seanz
01-07-2010, 08:08 PM
Seriously? You can't see the line running astern in this magnification?



There's a chance that might have been a joke....
:rolleyes:;)

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 08:10 PM
There's a chance that might have been a joke....
:rolleyes:;)

possibility does not equal probability...NEXT!

Captain Blight
01-07-2010, 08:12 PM
I believe that what Tom was saying is that ADY GIL was not displaying any signals that she had deployed a potential hazard to navigation.

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 08:14 PM
Sounds like a Dr. Seuss title.

Mr. Legalally was fishing for wfhales one day..
Trolling with perflectual minnules...

hey...you don't get to laugh at my txpng

J P
01-07-2010, 08:16 PM
Sounds like a Dr. Seuss title.

Mr. Legalally was fishing for wfhales one day..
Trolling with perflectual minnules...


Can you weave neurtal the turtle in there? :)

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 08:20 PM
gotta go...company

Captain Blight
01-07-2010, 09:12 PM
Red Hot Chili Peppers did a rap cover of Yertle the Turtle on their Freakey Styley record. It was pretty good.

Trawlercap
01-07-2010, 10:13 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMINeY1vMMs&feature=related

Still thinking about the drouge, that had figure into this.

This is good for another look at things, and this guy has a good time doing it.:D

seanz
01-07-2010, 10:21 PM
you're cheating...wfhat would do...YOU ARE CONVINCED THAT YOU ARE LEGALALLY FISHING FOR WFHALES...NO CHEATING!
I'll answer the same question in a bit...it's not a trap, really

No I'm not.
Here's the answer again from the post you quoted.



I'd take steps to avoid conflict to protect my crew and ship and inform the relevant authorities......because it's not as if I'm in the wrong


That's what I'd do.....because I'm not doing anything wrong and whaling is legal, right?........and I'm not in a whale sanctuary or anything?

I can hardly wait for the "not a trap" reply.
:rolleyes::p

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 10:49 PM
No I'm not.
Here's the answer again from the post you quoted.



That's what I'd do.....because I'm not doing anything wrong and whaling is legal, right?........and I'm not in a whale sanctuary or anything?

I can hardly wait for the "not a trap" reply.
:rolleyes::p

sorry...I must have read that but ...oh, I guess I responded to your last line...I should have ignored it...sorry

Phillip Allen
01-07-2010, 11:09 PM
okay, there are several possible things to do...emotionally, and to take the whale thing out of it for myself I pretend that it's just me on my boat and unknowns are trying to stop me for unknown purposes...I would kill them all if I could...but I said legally whaling and that means a ship and crew and all that that intales...

I am whaling and not running interfearance for anyone else...

the water cannon would likely be used...if I could knock one of the bandits into the ocean then they would have to stop and pick him up...that's to my advantage

report (broadcast) a distress signal...announce pirates aggressively trying to board.(that's for the lawyers to sort out later...it's now on the record)

I would evade as much as possible and consider heading away from the likely base for the agressive boat...streatch out his supply lines as much as possible

horns and such would be employed as is seen on the vedios

as to Phillip's personality and what I would likely do (sans anything leathal), I would throw grapnels and catch the pirate then tow him maybe stern most or sideways until he agreed to give up his ship's papers...if the bandit resorts to lethal violence...tow harder, threatening to break up his boat

all this depends on what the pirate partner does...I assume that boat will become agressive instead of just standing by and filming

if he becomes leathally agressive...remember the harpoon has an explosive tip as a last ditch defence (maybe it would start a fire)

the situation will have become very VERY vjolitle by this point and the winner may be decided by ruthlessness and speed and comitment

as you can see, things begin to escalate rather rapidly...it becomes a matter of brinksmanship and if the pirate continues to call any bluff from me than it becomes increasingly obvious that he means lethal harm to me and my crew...I fight...I NEVER turn my back toward my enemy(s)...in the face of agression, I advance...advance...advance

one more thing...go ahead, choke on my typos...it's okay with me

seanz
01-07-2010, 11:33 PM
The typos haven't caused me any harm.....so far.

We are not talking (despite the flag) about pirates. They are protesters. Even if whaling was legal there would still be protesters. Nothing you describe in your post is beyond what Greenpeace does.....let alone Sea Shepherd.
You wouldn't harpoon Greenpeace would you, Phillip?
Bad Phillip, very bad.
;)

Hmmm...got any French ancestory?
:D

High C
01-07-2010, 11:58 PM
....We are not talking (despite the flag) about pirates. They are protesters....

No they're not. They are terrorists/pirates/criminals...assaulting crew members with potentially blinding lasers...laying a trap to disable a vessel's ability to move, and you call this protest? Absurd.

They're lucky they got away with their lives.

seanz
01-08-2010, 12:24 AM
Yes they are protesters. Not, by any non-absurd definition, pirates. They are taking action to prevent a criminal act, this makes them criminals? But of course they are terrorists, as anybody that protests a state sanctioned activity is now automatically considered a terrorist.....
:rolleyes:

Protesters regulary board and prevent ships from moving, they are then arrested, not killed.
Because they're not pirates......no intelligent and civilized people would consider them pirates

TimH
01-08-2010, 12:38 AM
If I were a whaler and these "insane pirates" kept fking with me every year I would eventually give up. Its not worth it.

High C
01-08-2010, 12:43 AM
You're dead wrong, Sean. They had no jurisdiction to enforce any alleged legal violation. In addition to their attempt to cripple the Japanese vessel, they assaulted crew members with dangerous lasers. A quick hit with one of those things can cause serious eye damage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_safety

The Japanese vessel had the right to do whatever was necessary to stop the two pronged attack.

Since you seem to approve of vigilantism, maybe you should engage in a bit of citizen law enforcement in your hometown, maybe set up your own speed trap, and see how the local police respond to you.

Those idiots in the tri hull are lucky they weren't killed.

seanz
01-08-2010, 12:57 AM
You don't approve of vigilante action? You'll make Charles Bronson cry.
:rolleyes::D


You're dead wrong, Sean. They had no jurisdiction to enforce any alleged legal violation. In addition to their attempt to cripple the Japanese vessel, they assaulted crew members with dangerous lasers. A quick hit with one of those things can cause serious eye damage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_safety

The Japanese vessel had the right to do whatever was necessary to stop the two pronged attack.

Since you seem to approve of vigilantism, maybe you should engage in a bit of citizen law enforcement in your hometown, maybe set up your own speed trap, and see how the local police respond to you.

Those idiots in the tri hull are lucky they weren't killed.

I'm being nice......really I am. :)

What gives them the right?

S B
01-08-2010, 12:58 AM
Fer Christ sake people wake up, this has nothing to do with whaling and everything to do with parting the simple folk and there money.

TimH
01-08-2010, 01:03 AM
Fer Christ sake people wake up, this has nothing to do with whaling and everything to do with parting the simple folk and there money.

Thats it :rolleyes:

htom
01-08-2010, 01:10 AM
I believe that what Tom was saying is that ADY GIL was not displaying any signals that she had deployed a potential hazard to navigation.

Someone understood!

seanz
01-08-2010, 01:17 AM
Fer Christ sake people wake up, this has nothing to do with whaling and everything to do with parting the simple folk and there money.

Are some of those simple folk in Japan, perhaps?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/3215571/No-stern-complaint-over-whale-boat-stoush-Govt



The New Zealand Government has not received a reported "stern" complaint from Tokyo over the collision between the New Zealand trimaran Ady Gil and a Japanese whaling ship in the Southern Ocean, a spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully said today.
Japan's chief cabinet secretary Hirofumi Hirano was quoted by the Kyodo news agency yesterday saying a complaint had been lodged with the New Zealand government "in a stern manner" because the Ady Gil was registered in New Zealand, and Japan had urged the New Zealand "not to repeat such an incident in the future".
Mr McCully's spokesman told NZPA today that there was a "low-key" meeting yesterday in Wellington between the Japanese ambassador and Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) officials.
"According to information our embassy has got from the Japanese foreign ministry, he (Mr Hirano) didn't say there had been a protest made - there hasn't been one," the spokesman said.
"The low-key discussion was perfectly amicable between the two countries."
The Japanese ambassador was briefed on Maritime New Zealand's planned investigation into the collision because the Ady Gil was registered in New Zealand and MFAT discussed the need for a Japanese inquiry because of the Japanese ship's involvement.
"And we reiterated our very strong desire that both protagonists desist from further activity that results in a life-threatening situation."
Despite Mr McCully's call yesterday for the anti-whaling protesters from the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and Japanese whalers to show restraint before someone was killed, the five New Zealanders and the Dutchman rescued from the Ady Gil vowed to continue their fight.
The boat, formerly known as Earthrace, had its bow sheared off in the collision with the Shonan Maru No 2 near Commonwealth Bay on Wednesday.
Mr McCully said that MNZ would oversee an investigation of the collision, which was in the Australian search and rescue area, while Australia's acting Prime Minister Julia Gillard said the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) would conduct its own investigation.
The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society claimed the whaling ship deliberately rammed the New Zealand boat, but a group representing the Japanese fleet, the Institute of Cetacean Research, claimed footage of the crash showed the ship was trying to avoid colliding with the Ady Gil.




http://inl-images.adbureau.net/inl/accipiter/images/AE0.gif (http://inl.adbureau.net/accipiter/adclick/CID=fffffffcfffffffcfffffffc/aamsz=310x16_SPONSOREDLINK/POS=SPONSOREDLINK1/acc_random=35146189369/pageid=4735184326/site=s/area=s.stuff.national/SOURCEDOMAIN=www.stuff.co.nz/KEYWORD=AdyGil%20SeaShepherd%20Whaling?&_=1262931039035)

WX
01-08-2010, 01:34 AM
Institute of Cetacean Research

Apart from kill whales, they do what exactly?

Ian McColgin
01-08-2010, 01:40 AM
Question:

1. Who approves Sea Shepherd actions; v.

2. Who tolorates those actions to keep pressure to limit whaling but doesn't want to go there; v.

3. Who feels that Sea Shepherd's methods are the wrong way to oppose whaling; v.

4. Who feels that Sea Shepherd is wrong because whaling is right?

Personally, I'm somewhere between 1 and 2. If there are any 5's perhaps they will both say so and initiate a thread setting out their positions. But what I'm really interested in by the question is whether we're arguing about how to end whaling or whether some believe we should continue whaling.

WX
01-08-2010, 01:45 AM
Their argument that whaling is a part of Japanese culture is a bit thin. Also to claim that their whaling industry is primarily for research just so much BS.
http://www.icrwhale.org/japan-history.htm

WX
01-08-2010, 01:47 AM
Mix of 2 and 3.
Apart from Greenpeace they are the only ones trying to stop the Japs.

Nicholas Carey
01-08-2010, 02:34 AM
Apart from kill whales, they do what exactly?"Research" is, I believe, the term of art the ICR.

Here's a couple of recent (2008 and 2005, respectively) papers published by the ICR in peer-reviewed (?) journals:


Ishikawa, H. and Shigemune, H. 2008. Comparative Experiment of Whaling Grenades in the Japanese Whale Research Program under Special Permit (JARPA and JARPN). Jpn. J. Zoo Wildl. Med. 13(1): 21-28.
Ishikawa, H. and Shigemune, H. 2005. Improvements in More Humane Killing Methods of Antarctic Minke Whales, Balaenoptera bonaerensis, in the Japanese Whale Research Program under Special Permit in the Antarctic Sea (JARPA). Jpn. J. Zoo Wildl. Med. 10(1): 27-34.

Following up on that cutting-edge research, we get journal submissions like this from the ICR:


Konishi, K. and Tamura, T. 2007. Occurrence of the minimal armhook squids Berryteuthis anonychus (Cephalopoda: Gonatidae) in the stomachs of common minke whales Balaenoptera acutorostrata in the western North Pacific. Fisheries Science 73: 1208-1210.

Looking at their web site, they do other "research", such as surveying age, etc, of whales by killing them.

Presumably, since the common minke whale doesn't drink tequila, the only way to get them to part with their stomach contents is by use of the aforementioned whaling grenades.

After pumping their stomach, of course -- reduce, recycle, reuse! -- whale sushi:

http://i.current.com/images/asset/895/088/54/sYejFQ.jpg

More whale sushi at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5FunUFewnQ

and a review of a whale meat cookbook at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9iUhxmwhTw

johnw
01-08-2010, 03:00 AM
Clearly, the science is incidental to the whaling, rather than the other way around. It's a legal fiction that is allowed because of Japanese attitudes toward whales, which I've found in conversations with Japanese is quite different from ours. I've met quite intelligent Japanese who think of whales as fish. Therefore, they would think of them as a resource. Many people from English-speaking culture regard whales as at least as intelligent as dogs, and I suspect the protesters are likely to regard them as sentient. That's a pretty big cultural divide.

johnw
01-08-2010, 03:05 AM
I believe that what Tom was saying is that ADY GIL was not displaying any signals that she had deployed a potential hazard to navigation.
Refresh my memory. Aren't they supposed to display shapes? That would look cooler than a pirate flag anyway.

seanz
01-08-2010, 03:06 AM
Question:

1. Who approves Sea Shepherd actions; v.

2. Who tolorates those actions to keep pressure to limit whaling but doesn't want to go there; v.

3. Who feels that Sea Shepherd's methods are the wrong way to oppose whaling; v.

4. Who feels that Sea Shepherd is wrong because whaling is right?

Personally, I'm somewhere between 1 and 2. If there are any 5's perhaps they will both say so and initiate a thread setting out their positions. But what I'm really interested in by the question is whether we're arguing about how to end whaling or whether some believe we should continue whaling.

Definitely '2'.....with some sympathy but a shipload of reservations for '1'....the Sea Shepherd people are volunteers and they are prepared to die (they must be, they're playing chicken in the Southern Ocean :eek: ) for their cause.....I'm not entirely sure that's a good thing.....some of the crew are just kids. :(

The Bigfella
01-08-2010, 03:30 AM
JAPANESE authorities have criticised the environmental activist group Sea Shepherd for abandoning a vessel at sea, apparently leaking fuel and debris.

The Ady Gil was crippled in a collision with a Japanese whaling ship in the Southern Ocean on Wednesday.

Sea Shepherd spokespeople have repeatedly claimed the boat had sunk, and today the activist group abandoned the scene.

But Japanese authorities have released photographs which show the Ady Gil wreckage is still afloat in pristine Antarctic waters.

The official Institute of Cetacean Research said an oily substance thought to be fuel was leaking from the wreckage, "raising concerns that Sea Shepherd is wilfully polluting the Antarctic environment''.

A Japanese vessel salvaged part of the severed Ady Gil hull and some arrows.

The institute called on Australia and other countries to prevent Sea Shepherd's "vicious'' sabotage of the whaling fleet.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/ady-gil-abandoned-and-leaking-oil-japan/story-fn3dxity-1225817467945

seanz
01-08-2010, 03:38 AM
Clearly, the science is incidental to the whaling, rather than the other way around. It's a legal fiction that is allowed because of Japanese attitudes toward whales, which I've found in conversations with Japanese is quite different from ours. I've met quite intelligent Japanese who think of whales as fish. Therefore, they would think of them as a resource. Many people from English-speaking culture regard whales as at least as intelligent as dogs, and I suspect the protesters are likely to regard them as sentient. That's a pretty big cultural divide.

It's a huge divide really and in this case it's probably even more pronounced than the "OMG :eek: People eat dogs?!?!?" culture gap.

For me, it isn't about sentience or how endangered a species is*, it's about believing that maybe we humans could just leave one of the other mammal types to mind its own business and not eat it**.

*Well, it's a bit about those things.

** I hope Chuck starts feeling better soon, I miss his recipes.

seanz
01-08-2010, 03:40 AM
JAPANESE authorities have criticised the environmental activist group Sea Shepherd for abandoning a vessel at sea, apparently leaking fuel and debris.

The Ady Gil was crippled in a collision with a Japanese whaling ship in the Southern Ocean on Wednesday.

Sea Shepherd spokespeople have repeatedly claimed the boat had sunk, and today the activist group abandoned the scene.

But Japanese authorities have released photographs which show the Ady Gil wreckage is still afloat in pristine Antarctic waters.

The official Institute of Cetacean Research said an oily substance thought to be fuel was leaking from the wreckage, "raising concerns that Sea Shepherd is wilfully polluting the Antarctic environment''.

A Japanese vessel salvaged part of the severed Ady Gil hull and some arrows.

The institute called on Australia and other countries to prevent Sea Shepherd's "vicious'' sabotage of the whaling fleet.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/ady-gil-abandoned-and-leaking-oil-japan/story-fn3dxity-1225817467945

:eek:
It's The Boat That Wouldn't Sink!

bobbys
01-08-2010, 04:01 AM
Years ago i went to church with a great old guy, A disabled WW2 vet from the south that taught me many firefox skills.

He was one of the very last Whalers in America.

I bugged him for years for a harpoon..

He gave me on that holds a charge and cutting knives.

So i have a Whale outfit if needed.

I have the primer charges for the harpoon, A box from Norway.

The real Harpoon gun from the last Whaler is in town here.

One time i was thinking of loading it and firing off my harpoon but i would only harpoon a stray Ford

seanz
01-08-2010, 04:06 AM
Show some ambition....harpoon a Cadillac.....remember, get em in the rear side window if you want a daily driver......they drop quicker if you shoot them in the engine but then they're only good for the mantlepiece.

Phillip Allen
01-08-2010, 04:23 AM
Yes they are protesters. Not, by any non-absurd definition, pirates. They are taking action to prevent a criminal act, this makes them criminals? But of course they are terrorists, as anybody that protests a state sanctioned activity is now automatically considered a terrorist.....
:rolleyes:

Protesters regulary board and prevent ships from moving, they are then arrested, not killed.
Because they're not pirates......no intelligent and civilized people would consider them pirates

maybe you aren't cheating...maybe you just forgot...the ship's skipper is convinced he is legal...prevention of a criminal act plays no part in the pirates moves...none at all

what you are speaking is a political mid-act re defination of a parit act...keep that stuff in court and off the high seas

johnw
01-08-2010, 04:24 AM
Show some ambition....harpoon a Cadillac.....remember, get em in the rear side window if you want a daily driver......they drop quicker if you shoot them in the engine but then they're only good for the mantlepiece.
Ah, Ahab and his insane obsession with the white El Dorado...

Phillip Allen
01-08-2010, 04:35 AM
it is amazing that people continue to make decisions with emotion and not logic

seanz
01-08-2010, 04:49 AM
Buzz off Phillip.....I was just about to shutdown and go to bed.:D


maybe you aren't cheating...maybe you just forgot...the ship's skipper is convinced he is legal...prevention of a criminal act plays no part in the pirates moves...none at all

what you are speaking is a political mid-act re defination of a parit act...keep that stuff in court and off the high seas

You keep talking about pirates.....why? Not that there's anything wrong with that.......:D

OK then, I'll play.


maybe you aren't cheating.

No, I'm not, I answered your question.


maybe you just forgot...the ship's skipper is convinced he is legal

How could I forget, it was central to your question. Though, if I wanted to be sly, I could point out that being convinced what you are doing is legal may be different from you actions actually being legal.


prevention of a criminal act plays no part in the pirates moves...none at all

So it's not a protest then....they're just pirates?
Not really relevant to the thread......it's about conflict between whalers and protesters.



what you are speaking is a political mid-act re defination of a parit act...keep that stuff in court and off the high seas

Two things.

Sea Shepherd made no secret of the fact that they would be in the Southern Ocean again this year, there has been no 'mid-act redefinition'.....the protest was announced well ahead of time.

If the Japanese whalers just stayed in court to argue their case we wouldn't be having this discussion. Instead they have taken to the high seas to hunt whales......like the fascist pirates that they are.

There you go.

Phillip Allen
01-08-2010, 04:51 AM
(sigh)...go to bed now...sleep tight

seanz
01-08-2010, 04:58 AM
it is amazing that people continue to make decisions with emotion and not logic

The really amazing part is the emotions they choose.

Phillip Allen
01-08-2010, 05:01 AM
The really amazing part is the emotions they choose.

get along with ya now...you'll feel better after having some rest...that where I'm going back to myself (it's 4 degrees F outside and not all that warm inside this house either!)

Rob Stokes, N. Vancouver
01-08-2010, 05:55 PM
JAPANESE authorities have criticised the environmental activist group Sea Shepherd for abandoning a vessel at sea, apparently leaking fuel and debris.


Watson has a history of abandoning boats in pristine places . The Sea Shepherd II was abandoned off the west coast of Vancouver Island where it grounded, complete with an engine room full of associated fluids, and tanks of fuel.

I never had a lot of respect for Watson and his methods. But when he did that, he showed himself as the true fraud he is.

And now apparently, he's done it again...

seanz
01-08-2010, 07:36 PM
Mr Hansen said, adding that the ad had not cost the group "a cent" - because Lucas and its creators had given their time for free.
It's all about money, except for that bit and the steaming great pile of politics.


Here's a link to a story about things. It really does seem that it is all about money.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,,26564791-911,00.html

Here is a link to the southpark episode "whale whores" about the Japs and Sea Shepherd. It is too funny. And it seems prophetic in retrospect.
http://www.xepisodes.com/episodes/1311/Whale-Whores.htm (http://www.xepisodes.com/episodes/1311/Whale-Whores.html)


As for the poll: I think Sea Shepherd is a pirate/terrorist/guerrilla organization. Their methods endanger human lives on behalf of whales, which I believe is wrong. I think whaling is necessary, but should be done in a limited manner to insure an adequate population of all types of whales remain. While I love eating meat, I personally did not like the whale meat I ate in South Korea, but I generally don't like any kind of sea food. You'd have to kill an awful lot of cows to make up for a few whales, so if they'll eat whaleburgers and whaledogs more power to them.

You're from Save the Cows?

seanz
01-08-2010, 07:48 PM
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10619229&pnum=0



Anti-whaling activist Paul Watson has accused Foreign Minister Murray McCully of endangering the lives of activists in Antarctica by implying that they were trying to kill Japanese whalers.
Mr McCully said in a radio interview: "If people are determined to break the law and determined to kill other people on the high seas, then it is not the responsibility of the New Zealand Government or any other Government to send armed vessels down there or something of that sort to stop them."


Seems the whole 'endangering life' thing cuts both ways.
:rolleyes:

johnw
01-08-2010, 08:02 PM
So, Woody, why is whaling necessary? Do whales pose some danger to your way of life? Or do you think it is necessary for the Japanese to find a source of protein other than American beef?

Cows, we have plenty of. Whales, not so much. I don't have much use for Sea Shepard's methods, but clearly the Japanese are using a smokescreen about science to obscure the fact that they are engaging in a commercial harvest of whales, which is not allowed by treaty.

Nicholas Carey
01-09-2010, 02:33 AM
Whaling is necessary for the same reason why farming, hunting, and fishing are necessary. People got to eat!One can readily eat meat (or anything else) without eating whale. We're not running out of things to eat.


I've got no problem with others eating whales, as long as they don't make them go the way of the dodo.One big problem is that whales very nearly did go the way of the dodo [great auk, passenger pigeon, etc.] Think of them as maritime elephants, like their African brethren, on life support.

Nobody in Japan or Norway has "got to eat" whale. They may want to, but the don't need to, and mankind is not exactly lacking in available sources of animal protein.

Japan kills whales so expensive restaurants can offer well-heeled customers expensive whale sushi. It's got bupkus to do with Japan "needing to eat".

[leaving the argument about whether or not cetaceans are sentient or not to another day]

seanz
01-09-2010, 03:56 AM
Yeah, let the Japanese fish their own waters and eat their own whales.

George.
01-09-2010, 05:00 AM
Quite a double standard on display here.

I wish someone who is defending the whalers would explain to me why the Japs can engage in their chosen activity (whaling), while the Shepherds are wrong for engaging in theirs (interfering with whaling), given that:

- there is no specific law against either;

- both are convinced what they are doing is legal;

- no nation has jurisdiction over those waters;

- both are doing things that endanger human life.

Phillip Allen
01-09-2010, 08:54 AM
I'm not sure you're altogether right on that, George but I'm not in the mood to do all the typing needed...I wonder what a phone call would cost...?

SamSam
01-09-2010, 12:49 PM
Here is a link to the southpark episode "whale whores" about the Japs and Sea Shepherd. It is too funny. And it seems prophetic in retrospect.
http://www.xepisodes.com/episodes/1311/Whale-Whores.htm (http://www.xepisodes.com/episodes/1311/Whale-Whores.html)



The truth comes out, SJS, or Sudden Japanese Syndrome.

Ian McColgin
01-09-2010, 01:27 PM
It’s not necessary to read much to figure out that if Sea Shepherd were breaking any laws in this matter, someone would be on them. They claim not to break any laws but in the past some national authorities have brought charges.

But, were Mr. Allen and others who claim an interest to read, rather than type, they can easily click to the numerous sites that discuss this issue with some actual legal background.

Short form is that Sea Shepherd's claims to be following all international law in this matter and on the high seas (Cf. the Canadian seal hunt) are sound enough that no one is trying to arrest them. The Japanese apparent violations may or may not be enforceable in any terms - we'll see how the court action goes - but are at any rate not so blatant that anyone's navy is chasing them down.

It's analogous to a vigorous demonstration like any of the marches on Washington for various causes. You can have a lawful action even though there's some fringe lawlessness. You can have a deliberate "arrest strategy" provocatively but non-violently breaking a law. You can have a confrontation designed to tip the other side into some outrageous, perhaps even illegal behavior. You can have a strategy designed to provoke the police into what will be seen as an over-reaction. And on and on.

It's rarely so simple as one side or the other clearly breaking the law. Not all aspects of civil involvement are polite. As Malvina Reynolds sang when she was about 60 (which seemed old back when I first heard of her a couple of years later) concerning pressing US civil rights issues, but relevant to citizen involvement everywhere:

It isn't nice to block the doorway, 

It isn't nice to go to jail,

There are nicer ways to do it,

But the nice ways always fail.

It isn't nice, it isn't nice, 

You told us once, you told us twice,

But if that is Freedom's price,

We don't mind.

It isn't nice to carry banners 

Or to sit in on the floor, 

Or to shout our cry of Freedom 

At the hotel and the store.

It isn't nice, it isn't nice,

You told us once, you told us twice,

But if that is Freedom's price,

We don't mind.

We have tried negotiations

And the three-man picket line,

Mr. Charlie didn't see us 

And he might as well be blind.

Now our new ways aren't nice 

When we deal with men of ice,

But if that is Freedom's price, 

We don't mind.

How about those years of lynchings 

And the shot in Evers' back?

Did you say it wasn't proper,

Did you stand upon the track?

You were quiet just like mice,

Now you say we aren't nice, 

And if that is Freedom's price, 

We don't mind.

It isn't nice to block the doorway,

It isn't nice to go to jail,

There are nicer ways to do it

But the nice ways always fail.

It isn't nice, it isn't nice, 

But thanks for your advice, 

Cause if that is Freedom's price,

We don't mind.

Phillip Allen
01-09-2010, 05:48 PM
what's gonna happen with Watson's dumping of fuel and other trash?

seanz
01-09-2010, 05:52 PM
Yeah, and in a whale sanctuary too.

Nice post George. but there's precious little room for sensible here.
:)

High C
01-09-2010, 05:56 PM
So shining powerful lasers into the bridge of a moving ship is legal, and dragging lines to foul the props of said ship is also legal.

It's amazing what you can learn on the Wooden Boat Forum.

Phillip Allen
01-09-2010, 05:58 PM
So shining powerful lasers into the bridge of a moving ship is legal, and dragging lines to foul the props of said ship is also legal.

It's amazing what you can learn on the Wooden Boat Forum.

try a little experiment...go to a function where our president speaks and shine a laser light on the guy...we'll SEE if it's legal

Captain Blight
01-09-2010, 06:01 PM
It's only illegal if it's visible light. And how do you know they're "powerful" lasers? What's your threshold for "powerful," and how can you determine this from the video?

High C
01-09-2010, 06:15 PM
It's only illegal if it's visible light. And how do you know they're "powerful" lasers? What's your threshold for "powerful," and how can you determine this from the video?

Well, the lasers are quite visible in the videos, and are being shined from a considerable distance. The little laser pointers you can buy at the office store fade away in a much shorter distance, and those little guys are potentially dangerous. The lasers in the vids are clearly much more powerful, quite bright still at a great distance.

htom
01-09-2010, 06:29 PM
It's only illegal if it's visible light. And how do you know they're "powerful" lasers? What's your threshold for "powerful," and how can you determine this from the video?

It's illegal to shine a visible light laser into someone's eyes, but not an ultraviolet or infrared laser? Idiot lawmakers. You wouldn't even know to blink while you were being blinded!

seanz
01-09-2010, 07:11 PM
The whole problem with this is there is no international jurisdiction to prevent the type of use the Sea Shepherds employ.

That's the whole problem?.....maybe the Australian government could ban the use of lasers in a whale sanctuary.
That'd fix it.

Captain Blight
01-09-2010, 07:17 PM
Various countries and smaller jurisdictions have laws against both ownership and mischievous use of lasers over a certain power level. Usually, 5mW is the upper limit, although in Australia, it is 1mW.

Many countries also have federal laws expressly written to forbid shining a laser on an aircraft. Some include any moving vehicle in the prohibition.

If, as has been reported, the instruments used by the Sea Shepherds are the trademarked Wicked Laser Photonic Disruptor, they are 100mW devices, but are claimed to be modulated to prevent permanent damage to the target's eyes (as far as I can tell, this claim has never been substantiated). Obviously, if they impair the vision of a vehicle operator, they could easily cause other damage.I think it's kind of stretching the definition to call the wheelman of a whaler a "Vehicle operator" but YMMV.



The whole problem with this is there is no international jurisdiction to prevent the type of use the Sea Shepherds employ.This actually gives rise to whole series of questions. The first one I have to ask is, How are more laws going to solve this problem? How is more government intervention going to help? If Sea Shepherd Society is being run as a business, then what right does any government have to interfere with its business?

seanz
01-09-2010, 07:28 PM
You might ask that question of Obama.

And this was such a good thread.............:(:rolleyes:

Captain Blight
01-09-2010, 07:37 PM
Try to keep my statements you quote in context with the whole post. The post was about rules against ownership and use of lasers. The statement you quote refers to that, and nothing else.
Hmmm. No, I think I'm allowed to seize on an inconsistency and request that you clarify it. I think that's perfectly allowable.

What am I to ask of Mr Obama? The man doesn't have the right or ability to make law. That's up to the Legislative Branch. Anyway, I asked you first.

Captain Blight
01-09-2010, 07:50 PM
If you didn't wish the statement to be made available for public comment, you should have sent it in a PM, not posted it on a public Internet forum.

johnw
01-09-2010, 08:06 PM
Whaling is necessary for the same reason why farming, hunting, and fishing are necessary. People got to eat!
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/151/358317592_868aa124e5_o.jpg
While I prefer beef, turkey, or chicken slow smoked and slathered with barbecue sauce, I've got no problem with others eating whales, as long as they don't make them go the way of the dodo.

Yes I am from save the cows. Save the cows for me that is. :D
http://www.visualjokes.com/pics/cow.jpg
Of course, the whole point of the international ban on whaling is that whales very nearly went the way of the dodo. Unfortunately, international law lacks international law enforcement.

If I want to eat bald eagle, I can't go out and kill one and eat it without breaking the law. I don't have a problem with that. Do you?

Captain Blight
01-09-2010, 08:08 PM
Well, Donn, I did. Post 264, last sentence.

So: turn about being fair play: How about if you answer, snark-free, the questions I asked in 259? I certainly would not want to think you're holding me to a standard you're incapable of meeting.

seanz
01-09-2010, 08:50 PM
You're welcome to bow out.

You're welcome to take a long walk of a short pier.

Bless your heart.
:p

S B
01-09-2010, 11:41 PM
There are all sorts of laws on the Canadian books, Soliciting funds using false information, making false statements, reckless endangerment, hate mongering, uttering threats, just to list a few. The Can. gov. will not apply any of these laws and the "nature savers" continue to pocket hugh sums of money with impunity. None of them want to stop what they are protesting,it would be the equivalent to corp.suicide.

Duncan Gibbs
01-10-2010, 12:06 AM
I don't see any lasers whatsoever. If a 100mw red, green or UV laser was being fired its trace would show up clearly in the spray of the water cannon as the light was refracted and if it were a red or green laser there would be a corresponding red or green dot dancing around the bridge of the Japanese ship.

The Bob Barker sequence (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rar9zxH1kts&feature=related) also clearly shows how intent the Japanese ship was on running down the Sea Shepherd's tri' lurching hard to starboard before turning to port again. The tri' only starts moving forward at the very last two seconds.

The Japanese ship deserves to be prosecuted at the very least: Sunk at best! I'll go with Ian's #1 option thank you!

High C
01-10-2010, 12:12 AM
I don't see any lasers whatsoever. ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1Rs-GV7Mvg

seanz
01-10-2010, 12:36 AM
There are all sorts of laws on the Canadian books, Soliciting funds using false information, making false statements, reckless endangerment, hate mongering, uttering threats, just to list a few. The Can. gov. will not apply any of these laws and the "nature savers" continue to pocket hugh sums of money with impunity. None of them want to stop what they are protesting,it would be the equivalent to corp.suicide.

The Canadian government won't do anything about an American organization based (for this operation) in Australia that had its New Zealand registered boat sunk by the Japanese in the Southern Ocean........I wonder why not?