Whale Wars gets Hot

[Graydog]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34722032/ns/world_news-world_environment

Article:

SYDNEY - A conservation group's boat had its bow sheared off and was taking on water Wednesday after it collided with a Japanese whaling ship in the frigid waters of Antarctica, the group said.

The boat's six crew members were safely transferred to another of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's vessels, the newly commissioned Bob Barker. The boat is named for the American game show host who donated $5 million to buy it.

The clash was the most serious in the past several years, during which the Sea Shepherd has sent vessels into far-southern waters to try to harass the Japanese fleet into ceasing its annual whale hunt.

Clashes using hand-thrown stink bombs, ropes meant to tangle propellers and high-tech sound equipment have been common in recent years, and collisions between ships have sometimes occurred.

The society said its vessel Ady Gil a high-tech speedboat that resembles a stealth bomber was hit by the Japanese ship the Shonan Maru near Commonwealth Bay and had about 10 feet of its bow knocked off.

Locky Maclean, the first mate of the society's lead ship, said one crewman from New Zealand appeared to have suffered two cracked ribs but the others were uninjured. The crew was safely transferred to the group's third vessel, though the Ady Gil's captain remained on board to see what could be salvaged, he said.

"The original prognostic was that it was sinking, but at this point it is flooded with water but it seems to still have a bit of buoyancy," Maclean said by satellite phone from the ship, the Steve Irwin.

'Stopped dead'

The group accused the Japanese ship of deliberately ramming the Ady Gil.

"They were stopped dead in the water when the incident occurred," Maclean told The Associated Press of the Ady Gil. He spoke by satellite phone from the ship, the Steve Irwin.

"When they realized that the Shonan Maru was aiming right for them, they tried to go into reverse to get the bow out of the way but it was too late. The Shonan Maru made a course correction and plowed directly into the front end of the boat," he said.

Glenn Inwood, a New Zealand-based spokesman for the Institute of Cetacean Research, the Japanese government-linked body that carries out the hunt, disputed Sea Shepherd's account, saying video shot from the whaler showed the conservationists' boat moving toward the whaler just before the collision.

"The Shonan Maru steams to port to avoid a collision. I guess they, the Ady Gil, miscalculated," Inwood said. "Sea Shepherd claims that the Shonan Maru has rammed the Ady Gil and cut it in half its claim is just not vindicated by the video."

Japan's Fisheries Agency said it was still checking details about the clash. Spokesman Toshinori Uoya said there were no injuries on the Japanese side.

It was not immediately clear what would happen to the Ady Gil. Sea Shepherd said in a statement posted on its Web site that the boat was "believed to be sinking and chances of salvage are very grim."

Sea Shepherd sends boats to Antarctic waters each southern summer to try to stop the Japanese whaling fleet from killing whales under what it calls a scientific whaling program. Conservationists and many countries say the program is a front for commercial whaling.

Each side routinely accuses the other of dangerous activity during what has become a cat-and-mouse chase in one of the world's most remote regions.

Australia and New Zealand which both have Antarctica territories and are among the closest nations to the waters where the hunt goes on have urged both sides to show restraint, warning that they are far away from rescue if anything goes wrong.

"Our strongest condemnation applies to any violent or dangerous activity that takes place in these remote and inhospitable waters," Australian Environment Minister Peter Garrett said Wednesday. He said he could confirm the collision, but that details were still unclear.

Wednesday's confrontation with whalers marked the first for the 1,200-ton Bob Barker, which rescued the crew. Sea Shepherd only recently bought the ship after its namesake, the former host of the "The Price Is Right" game show and a longtime animal rights activist, donated the money. Barker met Sea Shepherd founder Paul Watson through a fellow activist and said he was instantly impressed.

"He said he thought he could put the Japanese whaling fleet out of business if he had $5 million," Barker recalled. "I said, 'I think you do have the skills to do that, and I have $5 million, so let's get it on,' so that's what we did."

Barker, 86, said he was "genuinely proud" to be associated with Sea Shepherd.

The Ady Gil, meanwhile, clashed earlier Wednesday with another Japanese ship, the whaling fleet's mothership, the Nisshin Maru.

Provocative actions

The Institute of Cetacean Research, the nonprofit organization that conducts the hunt, said the Ady Gil came "within collision distance" of the Nisshin Maru's bow and repeatedly dangled a rope in the water that could have entangled the ship's rudder and propeller.

The Ady Gil's crew lobbed small projectiles designed to release a foul smell, and the whalers responded by firing high-powered hoses to keep the Sea Shepherd vessels away, the institute said in a statement.

"The obstructionist activities of the Sea Shepherd threaten the lives and property of those involved in our research, are very dangerous and cannot be forgiven," it said.

Maclean confirmed the earlier clash.

Japan's whaling fleet left in November for its annual hunt in Antarctic waters. Uoya said that for security reasons, details of the fleet's composition, the number of whales it hopes to take and the number of crew members are not being released to the public.

The Ady Gil is a 78-foot trimaran made of carbon fiber and Kevlar in a design meant to pierce waves. It was built to challenge the record for the quickest circumnavigation of the globe and can travel faster than 46 mph.

Sea Shepherd unveiled the Ady Gil last October saying a California millionaire with the same name had donated most of the money for it. At the time, the group said the boat would be used to intercept and physically block Japanese harpoon vessels. (<-Mission accomplished! However, next time they may want to consider what their blocking boat is made out of vs. the size and weight of the ship they are trying to block with it.- Greydog)

Edited January 6, 2010 by Graydog

[Coastie04]

I have absolutely no respect for the seamanship of the anti-whaling activists, based on what I have heard and seen on the few shows I've watched. This is just one more in a long line of poor seamanship practices which is bound to get someone killed one day. I would not be at all surprised if they steamed at the high speed of 46 mph in to the path of this whaling ship, and stopped long enough to get the video footage of them being stopped before getting their bow chopped off. It just seems like their standard operating proceedure in order to stay in the news.

Coastie

[Mission]

Yes. Acting from passion in cases like this often produces questionable results from what I've seen.

[Captain Jim]

I just watched the video. It clearly shows the protester's boat accelerating into the path of the whaling ship. Watch the wake of the protester's boat for the cues. So, the protester's protestations that they had the right of way does not hold water as they did not try to avoid the collision and in fact caused it by accelerating into the path of the larger ship. It's as if the cap...ah...skipper of the protester's boat deliberately sacrificed his boat and put his crew in harm's way. Beyond poor seamanship, it's suicidal.

[capn'rob]

I have absolutely no respect for the seamanship of the anti-whaling activists, based on what I have heard and seen on the few shows I've watched. This is just one more in a long line of poor seamanship practices which is bound to get someone killed one day. I would not be at all surprised if they steamed at the high speed of 46 mph in to the path of this whaling ship, and stopped long enough to get the video footage of them being stopped before getting their bow chopped off. It just seems like their standard operating proceedure in order to stay in the news.

Coastie

In looking at the pic and the quote re: action taken by the Japanese ship, I can only remember the Old Rhime I learned for my seamanship as a lad, "If to Starboard Red appears, 'tis your duty to keep clear! If two lights you see ahead, turn to Starboard, show your Red!" Now, I know this is as ancient as "Privleged" and "Burdened" but I believe only the words have changed a bit. In a Crossing, the vessel to Starboard is Stand On! Bound to Hold Your Course. The Give Way Vessel is "Not to Pass Ahead Of" the Stand On Vessel. Of course ColRegs. Rule #1 is "If following the rules will cause a collision, don't follow the rules!

You do however, give reference to a higher law than ColRegs or any determined by Governments. The Law of the Sea! Plain Sea Sense and Seamanship. Sadly this is in short supply either near coastal, inland or offshore! The antics of the conservationist are just downright death defying and that puts at risk the Heros that risk their lives daily to save those who have accidently found themselves in peril. Not Asked For It!! These actions are just short of or maybe equal to the worst act, the False MayDay. I feel that states other than just Connecticut should require people to pass a test writen and driving, and be licensed to operate a boat. In CT the privlige is added on your drivers License like a motorcycle and if you are sited for Boating Under the Influence, You lose your License! The whole deal!

I travel the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway annualy. I live aboard my 34 ft,Maine Built Lobsterboat, finished as a motoryacht in 1968. As a retired mariner it just works out fine. As Joshua Slocum mentions so often through his Novel, I know there's Harmony within the crew! The ICW is another story! It is rare to have an overtaking vessel even signal let alone call on 13 and make a proper pass. They just don't get it! They're living in the longest, skinniest small town in the USA! The guy they throw a wake on today may save their lives tomorrow. Alas, I dream of the old days. When Captains were Professional and Operating Owners knew what they were doing.

Take care and see you in the PUB. Capn'Rob alias Dutch "X" his mark Bosun of the "Meka"II Beaufort, NC

More on the "Meka" www.pirate-privateer.com

[Matty Bottles]

This isn't related to this specific incident, but Green Peace's war against nukes has claimed lives.

[Coastie04]

capn'rob:

As I have recently passed the rules of the road test (and all other tests for my 100 ton master, 200 ton mate, and A.B. licenses/certicates), I'm actually quite familiar with them right now. It's rule 2, not rule 1 that requires vessels to avoid collision.

"Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case."

Additionally, Rule 17 (action by Stand-on Vessel) states:

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

I just happened to have the book handy for those (and added emphasis). Having not seen the full situation, I can only surmise that the anti-whaling vessel intentionally positioned itself in front of the whaling vessel, and the whaling ship either could not, or chose not to take sufficient actions to avoid collision. However, placing one's vessel in that position is poor seamanship and also against the rules required of a vessel who has right of way (maintain course and speed). Additionally, Rule 16 states that the "vessel which is directed to keep out of the way of another vessel shall, so far as possible, take early and substantial action to keep well clear" (emphasis added). However, when being antagonized by a protesting vessel capable of traveling 50 kts that decides to stop in your path, it's hard to take early and substantial action in a large, heavy boat with a great deal of momentum.

My opinions of these protestors remains unchanged.

Coastie

[capn'rob]

capn'rob:

As I have recently passed the rules of the road test (and all other tests for my 100 ton master, 200 ton mate, and A.B. licenses/certicates), I'm actually quite familiar with them right now. It's rule 2, not rule 1 that requires vessels to avoid collision.

"Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner, master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special circumstances of the case."

Additionally, Rule 17 (action by Stand-on Vessel) states:

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

I just happened to have the book handy for those (and added emphasis). Having not seen the full situation, I can only surmise that the anti-whaling vessel intentionally positioned itself in front of the whaling vessel, and the whaling ship either could not, or chose not to take sufficient actions to avoid collision. However, placing one's vessel in that position is poor seamanship and also against the rules required of a vessel who has right of way (maintain course and speed). Additionally, Rule 16 states that the "vessel which is directed to keep out of the way of another vessel shall, so far as possible, take early and substantial action to keep well clear" (emphasis added). However, when being antagonized by a protesting vessel capable of traveling 50 kts that decides to stop in your path, it's hard to take early and substantial action in a large, heavy boat with a great deal of momentum.

My opinions of these protestors remains unchanged.

Coastie

In the many years I've been in and around ships and boats there's always been the discussion of the small sailboat that stood his right of way with a large ship and was in fact, DEAD Right. I haven't sat for a USCG Test since the early 80s. They certainly changed from the late 60s. Also, the fact remains that these guys weren't in Our Waters so No rules apply. Only as you've stated and as I hlod true, the rules of Seamanship and Sea Sense. As also mentioned these similar antics by Greenpeace have resulted in Death. Again, dead right.

My sea time has been signed by the Masters I have served. I came up "through the hawsepipe" and feel the better for it

, for I would not ask a crew member to do any job that I have not or would not do. As Asst. Harbormaster of the Town of New Shoreham, Block Island, I was a very important individual! I operated the Pump Out Boat! I went by the name, "Capt. Crapper" and named my Pump Out Boat the "Thomas W" for Thomas W. Crapper, the man who invented the flush toilet. Ah, my license at work! The careful carrige of liquid cargo!

By custom back home, once one earned their Masters the "Cap'n" was applied to their name. As a boy i knew I wanted that and started by doing any work I'd be given in the boatyard in hopes of being able to work on those boats during the season. I've done many different manner of jobs in the industry over the years from car ferry and freight to commercial fishing. Yacht brokerage and deliveries to, well, pumping crap! I'm retired now and live aboard a Maine built diesel launch. I keep a vigilant watch underway because the "other guy" is probably on the cell phone!

[Coastie04]

Oh, I fully agree with you. about the laws of what is supposed to be common sense. Big, metal boat vs. small plastic one? Well, I guess Darwin needs to stay on top of his game sometimes. Yes I realize that the rules that I've quoted are from a USCG publication, but they were the international rules of the road. They are international because they apply on the high seas and are not just U.S. rules. They actually have their origin from standardized practices over hundreds of years, but specifically and more recently from the International Regulations for Prevention of Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS). In 1993, the International Maritime Organization adopted some amendments to the rules. So, these regulations have become common law of the sea for all countries due to their wide acceptance. Therefore, rules did apply. Unfortunately, common sense was apparently ignored by one party, as were the rules from what I have seen/heard.

Coastie