Sea Shepherd Building A Robot Army?

by Michael dEstries March 4, 2010
Categories: Animals, Causes.

Furthering the tools at their disposal to combat illegal whaling and fishing, Sea Shepherd is apparently looking to invest in robotically-controlled flying cameras.

According to news reports, the firm behind the “Octocopter” is readying a future demonstration of their technology for U.S. representatives of the anti-whaling organization. From the article,

“Developed over two years, the machine features state-of-the art electronic GPS wizardry and video and still cameras. The ‘octocopter’ – so called because of its eight propellers – is ‘flown’ like a helicopter and can be kept in the air for up to 30 minutes before batteries have to be recharged.”

Obviously, such a device would aide in filming illegal fishing vessels — but is limited by both battery and range to close encounters only. Depending on price, however, I wouldn’t be surprised if a small army of “eyes in the sky” were dispatched to be yet another thorn in the side of whaling vessels.

Check out more info on the Octocopter here.

via Sea Shepherd Forum

Categories: Animals, Causes.

About Michael dEstries

Michael has been blogging since 2005 on issues such as sustainability, renewable energy, philanthropy, and healthy living. He regularly contributes to a slew of publications, as well as consulting with companies looking to make an impact using the web and social media. He lives in Ithaca, NY with his family on an apple farm.

View all posts by Michael dEstries →

Imforthewhales

World Charter for Nature: Implementations

21. States and, to the extent they are able, other public authorities, international organizations, individuals, groups and corporations shall:

(a) Co-operate in the task of conserving nature through common activities and other relevant actions, including information exchange and consultations

(b) Establish standards for products and other manufacturing processes that may have adverse effects on nature, as well as agreed methodologies for assessing these effects

(c) Implement the applicable international legal provisions for the conservation of nature and the protection of the environment

(d) Ensure that activities within their jurisdictions or control do not cause damage to the natural systems located within other States or in the areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction

(e) Safeguard and conserve nature in areas beyond national jurisdiction

22. Taking fully into account the sovereignty of States over their natural resources, each State shall give effect to the provisions of the present Charter through its competent organs and in co-operation with other States.

23. All persons, in accordance with their national legislation, shall have the opportunity to participate, individually or with others, in the formulation of decisions of direct concern to their environment, and shall have access to means of redress when their environment has suffered damage or degradation.

24. Each person has a duty to act in accordance with the provisions of the present Charter, acting individually, in association with others or through participation in the political process, each person shall strive to ensure that the objectives and requirements of the present Charter are met.

——————————————————————————–

This UN Charter was upheld in 1995 when Captain Paul Watson cited the Charter as his authority to order Spanish and Cuban drag trawlers off the Nose and Tail of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. Captain Watson had been arrested in this area, outside of the Canadian 200 mile limit, by Canadian authorities and was charged with felony mischief.

During the court proceedings, the jury was advised by the Judge that Canada was a signatory to the World Charter for Nature, and as such, they must take the Charter into full account.

Captain Watson was acquitted “by reason of colour of right,” and at the same time established a Canadian precedent for using the Charter to defend actions of intervention against illegal fishing activities.

Note: Colour of Right is a common law defense defined as “an honestly held belief in entitlement to property” (Source: Jurist Canada)

Mick

imforthewhales,

“Captain Watson was acquitted “by reason of colour of right,” and at the same time established a Canadian precedent for using the Charter to defend actions of intervention against illegal fishing activities.”

Your information is incorrect. He was found guilty and sentenced to 30 days imprisonment, fined and placed on probation for 2 years. The following is an excerpt from the summary of the judges’ decision.

“Inasmuch as Mr. Watson’s defence to this charge was that he acted under
colour of right in that he himself believed that he was authorized to do what he did by
the UN Declaration (1982) known as the World Charter for Nature, his conviction also
carries with it the conclusion that the jury were satisfied that the Crown had proven
beyond a reasonable doubt that he did not have such an honest belief.”

The judge also said, “the boat Watson attacked, the Rio Las Casas, was an innocent victim. It was not in violation of any law when Watson attacked it.”
ddpalmer

You really need to actually read what the court said.

They said that the UN WCfN DOES NOT give Paul Watson any enforcement powers, but if he TRUELY BELIEVES it the ‘colour of right defense can be used.

So now that he KNOWS from a court ruling that the UN WCfN DOES NOT give him any enforcement powers it can no longer be used as a defense.

You really should do a little investigating before you drink the kool-aid.

Imforthewhales

24. Each person has a duty to act in accordance with the provisions of the present Charter, acting individually, in association with others or through participation in the political process, each person shall strive to ensure that the objectives and requirements of the present Charter are met.

Note the words ” duty to act”.

Mick

imforthewhales,

Section 24 states, “Each person has a duty to act in accordance with the provisions of the present Charter” and “strive to ensure”.

Section 21(e) states, “Safeguard and conserve nature in areas beyond national jurisdiction.”

Section 23 states, “in accordance with their national legislation”.

Nowhere does it grant anyone authority to act as law enforcement. Nowhere does it authorize anyone to break the law or to attack people.

Imforthewhales

Sections 21-24 of the Charter provides authority to individuals to act on behalf of and enforce international conservation laws.

It is an authority to enforce. But… I’m sure you don’t want to hear that either.

Kinda too bad really.

Mick

imforthewhales,

“Sections 21-24 of the Charter provides authority to individuals to act on behalf of and enforce international conservation laws.”

You should read it again. It says no such thing. Nowhere does it say “act on behalf of” or “enforce”.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

“Each person has a duty to act in accordance with the provisions of the present Charter” and “strive to ensure”.

Take a look at that a moment. Each person has a duty to act. A duty to act!
That is what is driving the actions to interfere with the whalers.

As for the other thing, I have linked a pdf that showed when and why the ICR was made, and in fact you seem to turn the blind pro-whaler eye to the fact that he ICR is in existence, per their own website, to bring back commercial whaling, hence lifting the ban.

The 1986 documentary sated that a retiring harpooner was to get the last whale of that season, number 941. Presently, the whalers seek a number very close to that, but with your circle arguments, and dead horse beating to make us all rehash the same tired arguments, you seem to not be understanding this.

Also, it is now more clear, with the impending ban on Tuna, that Japan is digging it’s heels in on whaling as preparation to the Tuna ban. It really is not about the whales for Japan, it is pride.

Deacon Jones

You can try to cut up the UN World Charter for Nature but if you follow one line you have to follow all of them.

The Sea Shepherds can’t pick and choose which articles to follow. They have to follow the entire thing not just a sentence. The UN World Charter for Nature does NOT give authority to anyone at any time to police the world. They could get away with it once by ‘color of right’ but now any court that deals with them can throw the book at them because they now know that one sentence in the charter does not grant them any special powers.

The charter is not a law making device and it is not a legally binding treaty. It’s just a nice little ‘respect nature’ guideline for all member states.
Mick

Leonard Greene,

“I have linked a pdf that showed when and why the ICR was made, and in fact you seem to turn the blind pro-whaler eye to the fact that he ICR is in existence, per their own website, to bring back commercial whaling, hence lifting the ban.”

“The 1986 documentary sated that a retiring harpooner was to get the last whale of that season, number 941. Presently, the whalers seek a number very close to that….”

I have never discussed the PURPOSE of the creation of the ICR with you. I have discussed the fact that scientific research on whales was being carried out a long time before the moratorium. In order to refute your implication that scientific research only began after the moratorium, which is clearly incorrect.
On different occasions on different websites I have clearly stated that the PURPOSE of the ICR’s research was to provide scientific evidence that limited and sustainable commercial whaling could resume.
Therefore, your earlier assumption is incorrect. You must have me confused with someone else.

In regards to your 1986 documentary. I have provided you with facts from the IWC’s website that clearly proves that in the 1986/87 season Japan took a total of 2567 whales under objection for commercial purposes. Far more than the 941 you referenced. In addition they also took 1,941 whales in the 1985/86 season. Again, far more than the 941 you claim. Therefore your contention that the current numbers taken for research and those taken for commercial reasons are close, is wrong.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

Oh, if you are going to use the total number of whales take for the year, then yes, it makes me look wrong. the documentary was only dealing with the season for the SO whale hunt that actually gave the number of 941 whales before they went back home. As for the whales they hunted further north,That could make the rest of the numbers up as they hunt Minke, Sei, and other whales closer to their own waters, including species NOT wanted killed by the IWC.
Imforthewhales

Who really knows how many whales the Japanese are taking from the worlds oceans?

The worlds rapidly diminishing tuna stocks is now in dire straights…with the blue fin tuna likely appearing on the worlds list of endangered species very soon.

The Japanese have been fishing tuna over quota for the past twenty years, perhaps more, reaping them billions of dollars in revenue for their deliberate carelessness.

Who said crime doest pay?? Who is to say that the same thing isn’t happening with their whaling?

As far as whales go, Japanese not only kill whales in the Southern Ocean sanctuaries where they are “protected”. They also hunt whales in the Pacific and around Japans shores…dolphins and the like.
What they don’t catch they try to import one way or another from countries such as Iceland and Norawy.

Then there is the issue of ” bycatch” whereby any whales caught in nets somehow become ” bycatch” and are processed as such. Just another example of Japan bending the rules to suit themselves…there has been a steady increase of whales being caught in nets since the bycatch rule came into place.

Considering that some whale meat ends up as dog food, and also when you are aware of how damaging this whole issue is to Japans image, I find it very difficult to understand their total fascination for whaling.
Mick

Leonard Greene,

“Oh, if you are going to use the total number of whales take for the year, then yes, it makes me look wrong. the documentary was only dealing with the season for the SO whale hunt that actually gave the number of 941 whales before they went back home. As for the whales they hunted further north,That could make the rest of the numbers up as they hunt Minke, Sei, and other whales closer to their own waters, including species NOT wanted killed by the IWC.”

If you had bothered to actually look at the IWC website, you would discover that in BOTH the 85/86 and the 86/87 season, the whalers took 1,941 “MINKE” whales in the “SH”(Southern Hemisphere). Which means that you don’t just “look” wrong, you ARE wrong. By the way, if you would take the time to look for information instead of relying solely on a documentary, you would find that the USSR took 3,028 minke whales in the SH in 1985/86 and 86/87, too.

JIM

The UN charter has a limitation the SS conveniently overlooks. 21 begins with the phrase “to the extent they are able”. This phrase requires Sea Shepherd to remain within the bounds of law and does not give free reign to do whatever the heck they feel is justified. Ship ramming and prop fouling and launching botles of acid and paint are not within the bounds of law. They go beyond lawful protest. This is a part of the judge’s comments on the Canadian case that you misapply as justification for Watson’s continued use of the charter as a shield for his actions:

“Legitimate and lawful protest and public education on
environmental issues must take place within the parameters prescribed by law. There
is therefore a role for general deterrence in such circumstances, to bring home the
point to Watson and others that, no matter the strength of one’s belief in the moral
rightness of one’s cause, it does not, in the eyes of the law, allow for the taking of
the law into one’s own hands.”

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

And yet, had the Australian authorities done what they had vowed to do, the need for private people to go down and defend the whales would not have been needed. Votes were gotten, then forgotten. What you folks who are so in support of the Big Corporates who manipulate the laws they undermine fail to realize is that this whaling is done in waters that are wide open, as much as the old west used to be. That is a gray zone, had the Australians actually patrolled these waters more forcefully, or arrested the whalers the first time they set foot on Australian ports, that may have sunk in on a lot of folks.

As to the extent that they are able to, can be liberally translated as to do whatever one can, period. I applaud the fact that only collisions that have yet to be investigated have occurred as opposed to shooting guns or rockets have taken place.

Basically, until the authorities expand their influence over the SO, yes, people can and will take the law into their own hands, In case it had not occurred to you, the whalers have also committed questionable acts, the worst being the deliberate destruction of the Ady Gil, coming very close to murder had the vessel not swung itself with that left engine activation. Had they realized the SM-2 was going to do that earlier, they likely could have gotten away, they had no idea the captain of that whale-hunter was going to do what he did.

Stinks bombs and not explosives have been thrown. Prop foulers that seem to always be cut by the very vessels have been more a slower down than an actual threat.

Deacon Jones

Leonard, That’s just it.. The Australians have no authority to do anything. They are upset that people are whaling and tried to bend the ATS to create a whale sanctuary.

The Australians have to go to a court hearing before they can make any legal claims to the waters the Japanese are whaling in.

The Sea Shepherds are not Australia’s police force. They have no right to act in those waters on the Australian government’s behalf.

The Ady Gil’s pilot at the time said he didn’t even see the SM2 coming. Peter Bethune was on top of the vehicle and did not order any movement of the vehicle. From all the footage I’ve seen the Ady Gil pretty much put itself in harms way and then when the SM2 got close to it it accelerated into the SM2. In the Ady Gil footage you can even hear Bethune screaming at the Ady Gil’s pilot to try and stop the acceleration.

Stink bombs and prop foulers are not the tools of a maritime police force. They’re not the tools of any police force. The Sea Shepherds are not police and have no authority in international waters.
Imforthewhales

n the Ady Gil footage you can even hear Bethune screaming at the Ady Gil’s pilot to try and stop the acceleration.

Thats an interesting comment. That looks as though Ady Gil was trying to get out of the way of the japanese ship that was bearing down on them.

Perhaps they could of if given fair warning, not forced to react within a millisecond.

Its not hard to see who was under the most steam.

Another interesting comment today in the NZ press.

“The Japanese Daily Yomiuri reported that while it is possible to crack down on acts of piracy such as robbery based on the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea and anti-piracy law, “the Foreign Ministry does not regard Sea Shepherd protest activities as acts of piracy”.

The Japanese whaling machine will be doing their best to come up with other charges to suit their purposes, no doubt. All the same this must be turning into one big headache for them?

Imforthewhales

he UN charter has a limitation the SS conveniently overlooks. 21 begins with the phrase “to the extent they are able”. This phrase requires Sea Shepherd to remain within the bounds of law and does not give free reign to do whatever the heck they feel is justified.

Who says? You?

When did you become bigger than the UN?

Seems to be that : as they are able” means just that…if youa re able, then you go in to bat. If you have massive support, means you can do more because you are more able.

You might not like SS heading off south to the Antartic to take on the illegal whalers. But they are doing the job the navy should be doing. Fortunatly, they do a good job and keep getting support from the public, nowhere more so than Australia which is very solid indeed.

If the Japanese don’t like it down there with SS on their tail, and dont like the small of stinky butter, maybe..just maybe…they will realise that they are not wanted here…maybe they will get the message to bugger off back to Tokyo…

Legitimate and lawful protest and public education on
environmental issues must take place within the parameters prescribed by law. There
is therefore a role for general deterrence in such circumstances, to bring home the
point to Watson and others that, no matter the strength of one’s belief in the moral
rightness of one’s cause, it does not, in the eyes of the law, allow for the taking of
the law into one’s own hands.”

One thing i have noticed about Canada and that is they don’t like their status quo being challenged. Its almost pitiful…and are pretty good at juggling the rules to suit themselves. Their press is some of the most biased in the ” modern” world.

Most people worldwide like to support the status quo. Its safe and cuddly to be within its grasp. But what to do when the status quo not only lets the people down and becomes ineffective? The Status quo all round the world are failing to stop the jugernaughts that are killing off the world.

Having been invaded once before by japan, Australians take a different mindset and support the people who take on these jugernaughts when the status quo are not only ineffective but are activly tied in closely 9 via trade) with the jugernaughts. .

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

Deacon, the footage showed that even Pete had no idea of the danger they were until it was too late.
The SM-2 moves very nimbly for something over 500tons, and that is die to being a vessel designed to attack whales, and track them. Add tot hat fact the water cannon obscuring…..OBSCURING the view of the bow of the SM-2, and it makes it hard for one to see they intended to attack the AG, the acts of the AG was to fire up the left engine to make it pivot to the right and avoid a worse hit than they were about to receive. Even a Maritime lawyer has weighed in, for the most part, that it it would seem to be the SM-2 was at fault, and in honesty, he then gave a opinion that the AG agitated the SM-2. Even though the SM_2 had been also engaging in agi9tating behavior of it’s own when it came upon the SI and sprayed with the water cannon. So, both sides used their tricks on each other, the SM-2 captain is the one winding up T-boning another vessel.
ddpalmer

If Pete had no idea then he failed as a captain. They had been harassing the Shonan Maru for over 3 hours and then they decided to stop and they just assumed that the people they had been harassing wouldn’t be a little pissed off?

From their own video they saw the Shonan Maru a good 2 minutes before the collision and they were joking about what had been going on all day. At that point, at the latest, they should have realized that the Shonan Maru wasn’t done ‘playing’ even if Pete had decided he was.

And the water cannon was aimed to port the whole time and didn’t obscure the Shonan Maru bow. And the fact that the water cannon was still going along with the LRAD was just another indication that the Shonan Maru wasn’t standing down just because Pete had slowed down.

I don’t know whether the Shona Maru intended to hit the Ady Gil or just make a close approach with the water cannon, but the Ady Gil had enough warning and time to avoid them in either case.
Imforthewhales

I don’t know whether the Shona Maru intended to hit the Ady Gil or just make a close approach with the water cannon, but the Ady Gil had enough warning and time to avoid them in either case.

They were half a mile away from the Japanese ship for starters…so they were already ” out of the way” and were clearly idle in the water witht he Japanese ship at good speed making all the manouvres.

The Japanese did not make their intentions clear ( ie they in no shape or form let it be known that their intention was to ram the Ady Gil). They could have done this over a loudspeaker, or by ships radio. They could even have aimed their ship directly at the Ady Gil, thius giving their intentions away but instead the japanese made their move at the last second.

The Japanese had the speed and the direction to make the most out of avoiding a collision but this worked in their favour when they took out the Ady Gil.

Given even a minutes warning might have meant that Ady Gil could have taken defensive measures. A radio boradcast, morse code, a flag raised…anything would have done. However the crew of the Ady Gil, relaxing on deck, were taken by total surprise by a determined Japanese captain making full use of the ” element of surprise”
Imforthewhales

dpalmer, March 16, 2010 at 6:26 pm

If Pete had no idea then he failed as a captain. They had been harassing the Shonan Maru for over 3 hours and then they decided to stop and they just assumed that the people they had been harassing wouldn’t be a little pissed off?

**********************************************

Pete Buthane didn’t fail as the Japanese had given no signals that they were prepared for a possible deadly action.

His only failing was underestimating just how far the Japanese would go…above and beyond the laws of the sea… to keep the illegal Japanese whaling machine operating at full capacity…even tot he extent where others lives were put in grave and immediate danger.

You seem to be saying that Pete B should have assumed that the Japanese captain would attempt a ramming.

I’m sure the corporate giant that is Japanese whaling had been pissed off all day DD palmer and maybe even all week.

But are you implying that because a captain of a large ship is ” pissed off” that he can attempt to cut in half another ship and endanger the lives of the ships crew?

I agree with you that the Japanese whaling ships cannot be trusted to preserve life ..and more to the point, shouldn’t be trusted.

But thats easy to say after the event.

Any trust that may have existed previous to the ramming of the Ady Gil is now long gone and sits at the bottom of the Southern Ocean, alongside Pete Bethunes ship that the Japanese whalers destroyed.
Deacon Jones

Oh I see Leonard Greene. The SM2 was more nimble than the super maneuverable and incredibly fast Ady Gil. That makes no sense whatsoever. The Ady Gil stopped where it was in the path of the SM2. They were talking in the video about whether or not they should shoot it some more. They knew where they were and what was coming for them.

The water cannon made the inexperienced pilot throttle up and charge the SM2? Possible. But the captain didn’t the pilot to do anything when he throttled up and into the SM2.

The blind pilot added to the the fault of the collision. The remainder of the fault of which falls almost entirely on Pete Bethune for putting his historic boat in harms way of another ship. It’s plain to see.

JIM

The judge seemed quite clear in the Canadian case that you think authorizes Watson’s behaviour. There is no gray area here. In his instructions to the jury, he said that the charter does not give Watson the right to do what he did then and continues to do now. The defense used at that time was that Watson “believed” the charter gave him authority. Despite Watson’s claim on his website, that this court case somehow vindicates his use of the charter; it does no such thing. “Colour of right” does not mean what Watson states on his website and the charter itself was not the basis of his defense. It is worth noting that in the appeal of this case, Watson and his attorneys did not take exception to the Judge’s instruction to the jury that the charter offered no authorization to Watson.

Imforthewhales

Regardless of anything that puppets of the Canadian admin might have to say about something that they have a vested interest in, the fact remains that SS , PW and crew won their case.

the fact remains that the UN charter is in place, is there for everyone to read, and as yet they have not re-written the rules of the road there. It is binding for any nation that has joined the UN to pay heed to its directives.

ddpalmer

How does PW being convicted of a felony translate into winning their case?
Mick

imforthewhales,

“…the fact remains that SS , PW and crew won their case.”

As ddpalmer pointed out, you are wrong. paul “the captain” watson was convicted and sentenced to 30 days in jail, fined and given 2 years probation.

Michael Raymer

“Stink bombs and prop foulers are not the tools of a maritime police force. They’re not the tools of any police force. The Sea Shepherds are not police and have no authority in international waters.”

That’s nonsense. Police forces all over the world use tear gas and pepper spray which is much more debillitating than a stink bomb. Police forces also use puncture strips to flatten the tires of cars. These are directly analagous to the use of prop foulers at sea. Don’t pass yourself off as a law enforcement expert unless you can show credentials.

International waters are just that. There is no police force. The same rationale that whalers use for their activities is the exact same rationale the Sea Shepherds use to justify theirs. If you don’t like it, get a boat and go stop them. Oh, wait. Then you would be taking the law into YOUR hands. Hmmmm…it’s all so confusing.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

Actually, Michael. There is footage of a type of small scale prop-fouler for use by maritime police being worked on, it resembles a grenade launcher, but deploys a net-like device that can stop a small boat. Based on footage from whale wars, it appears that the Japanese whaling vessels have a line cutter under their keels as almost all of the prop-foulers used by the SSCS have been cut in half by the harpoon ships.

And Palmer, as for the issue of Pete’s awareness of the danger, they had been at the game of cat and mouse all day, and it was basically the part of the day to call it quits, tell me how often it is that you yourself have not seen something about to happen that caught you off guard, it happens even to the best of us. And yeah, they thought the SM-2 was going to just pass by them like the other vessels, as there were the other marus passing away and not coming at them, at worst, they may have expected a watercannon spritz, not a T-boning. Now there are lawyers of maritime law stating the SM-2 was the give way vessel, but they make allowance for it being a mistake. Maybe that will come out under the investigations, or in court, maybe it won’t, neither side will know until the news is announced.

ddpalmer

Yes the Shonan Maru was the give way vessel. But the COLREGS also require all vessels to do everything possible to prevent a collision. So minutes before the collision when they saw the Shonan Maru turn towards them it became incumbent on them to start paying attention and do what they could to prevent an incident. But they didn’t they stay at slow cruise waving to the Bob Barker and laughing at the Japanese. That doesn’t mean the Japanese didn’t violate the COLREGS but the Ady Gil could also be held partly responsible.

That is the way the maritime regulations are written and the way they have been interpreted in courts for decades. Both vessels will be held partly responsible the only real question is what percentage will be assigned to each of them.
Imforthewhales

From what I have read about maritime law and from what i saw ont eh videos, the japanese aimed directly for the Ady Gil.Everything they did violated maritime law…such as due care to prevent a collision etc.

I havnt read or seen anything that supports the japanese version of events…its clear that the japanese are twisting things to suit themselves.

The fact that they attempted to water blast the crew of the Ady Gil off theor broken boat after they have rammed them speaks ill for their intentions.

Sea Cucumber

Hey Grey Cell, or whatever name you’rre using here…. You know, for someone who say what you don’t like are “unemployed and living in their parents’ basement or getting paid for this — and I really can’t say which is more pathetic”, this is *really* hypocritical considering that the Sea Shepherds were begging for everything from ship machine supplies to VEGAN CONDOMS!?!?! Are you kidding me? You dare to call anyone pathetic when you idiots can’t even buy your own vegan condoms? Now *that’s* TRULY pathetic!

Also pathetic is the fact that you change your name every few posts and you try not to use the same one in multiple places. You’re a little coward, just like your buddy AnimuX. Look at his posts – posting every link that exists and comments on none. Like you – thinks he’s an expert in all, but is a master of none.

Tell MN Hope that he’s still outclassed, and that’s why he had to beg for help because he was too damn stupid to continue on his own. That’s because Paul Watson isn’t there to whisper what he should be thinking in his ear.

Oh, by the way…. Tell Rich when he’s out in the Med on the Barker trying to cut tuna nets that the fishermen have a few surprises in store for you guys! If I were him, I wouldn’t count on some tin badges saving his hide out there this time!

One last thing – congratulations on converting the Ady Gil to the first submarine used in anti-whaling activities! Wait a minute – aren’t they supposed to surface at some point? Nevermind! Did you save a piece of it for Danielle Bethune to have for her birthday so she and Sharyn can remember what a stupid idiot Peter is? What’s a couple of years in a Japanese prison, right? Yes, Peter in Cell B-14 will be having the Sei whale sashimi tonight please! Like I said on your forum – it was stupid of him to do what he did.

Imforthewhales

Seacumber, how long have you been a member of sea sheperd?

ddpalmer

Lets make it easy Imforthewhales.

“Rule 5

Look-out

Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight as well as by hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

Rule 7

Risk of Collision

(a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist.

(b) Proper use shall be made of radar equipment if fitted and operational, including long-range scanning to obtain early warning of risk of collision and radar plotting or equivalent systematic observation of detected objects.

(c) Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information, especially scanty radar information.

(d) In determining if risk of collision exists the following considerations shall be among those taken into account:

(i) Such risk shall be deemed to exist if the compass bearing of an approaching vessel does not appreciably change;
(ii) Such risk may sometimes exist even when an appreciable bearing change is evident, particularly when approaching a very large vessel or a tow or when approaching a vessel at close range.

Rule 8

Action to Avoid Collision

(a)Any action taken to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be positive, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good seamanship.

(b) Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit be large enough to be readily apparent to another vessel observing visually or by radar;

a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed shall be avoided.

(c) If there is sufficient sea room, alteration of course alone may be the most effective action to avoid a close-quarters situation provided that it is made in good time, is substantial and does not result in another close-quarters situation.

(d) Action taken to avoid collision with another vessel shall be such as to result in passing at a safe distance. The effectiveness of the action shall be carefully checked until the other vessel is finally past and clear.

(e) If necessary to avoid collision or allow more time to asses the situation, a vessel may slacken her speed or take all way off by stopping or reversing her means of propulsion. ”

So Rule 5 requires them to be on constant watch for a collision situation, Rule 7 requires them if in doubt to assume a collision risk exists and Rule 8 requires everyone even if they have the right of way to attempt to prevent a collision.

So if the Shonan Maru was trying to hit the Ady Gil then they were in violation of just about everything in the COLREGS, but even if that was the case the Ady Gil still had a responsibility to be aware of the situation and the potential close approach of the Shonan Maru and to avoid that situation. So no matter how many parts of the COLREGS the Shonan Maru was in violation of, the master and crew of the Ady Gil did not meet their responsibilities either. You can justify it and try and blame the Shonan Maru but under maritime regulations the Ady Gil will be assigned some of the blame unless they can show that they were physically unable to change their speed or direction.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

Chances are the bulk of the blame/responsibility will be on the vessel who’s bow connected with the flank of the the other vessel. Even in a car collision, the one hit is assigned a small percent of the blame. AG likely will be hit with 10%.

Sea cucumber, likely was banned, and so is probably butt hurt and venting, we all shall just have to ignore the childish remarks by that one.

Imforthewhales

Thanks DDP everything i read there applies to the Japanese ship…no question they are at fault.

Thanks for making it so easy for me…:)

ddpalmer

You obviously still have the comprehension problem.

I concede that the Japanese violated parts of the COLREGS but so did the Ady Gil.

Imforthewhales

so DD palmer, do you think the Japanese have got away with it?

ddpalmer

Do I think they have got away with what?

As I understand it the collision incident is still under investigation by New Zealand and Japan, the two countries involved. Once they reach a conclusion I expect they will issue their findings and announce any charges they are making.

Imforthewhales

DD Palmer…do you think the Japanese ship would have been as direct on its path of choice if the ship had been the size of the Steve Irwin or the Bob Barker?

Its funny but i cant seem to remember the Japanese whalers executing the same manouver on a ship of any decent size or a ship that was made of steel.

Perhaps they knew that the Ady Gil was fairly light ( being made of carbon fiber and all) and would be unlikely to cause any significant damage to their own ship? Perhaps they thought that they could catch the Ady Gil by surprise and take them out?

Just a thought.
Imforthewhales

The Government could explore the legal opportunity in the Maritime Crimes Act 1999, to release New Zealander Pete Bethune, the Green Party said today.

“Minister of Foreign Affairs Murray McCully has conceded jurisdiction in this case to Japan, but Japan’s claim is arguably invalid. All the talk of the Government not being able to interfere with the Japanese legal system is a farce. The New Zealand legal system could be dealing with this issue,” Green Party Oceans Spokesperson Gareth Hughes said.

New Zealand citizen Pete Bethune of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society boarded the Japanese vessel Shonan Maru No 2 while in the high seas to make a citizen’s arrest of the captain. The captain of the Shonan Maru No 2 allegedly rammed and destroyed the Ady Gil – a New Zealand registered vessel captained by a New Zealand citizen.

Australian based lawyer working in this field, Ronald Browne, has advised that New Zealand is a signatory to the Rome Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation.

This Convention was incorporated into New Zealand law through the Maritime Crimes Act 1999. Section 8 (1) of the Act specifies extra-territorial jurisdiction – that New Zealand law applies to acts committed against a ship in the high seas if that ship is registered in New Zealand.

Consequently, the captain of the Shonan Maru could be charged under New Zealand law for a crime punishable by up to 14 years in prison.

“I am surprised that the Government has so readily conceded jurisdiction, rather than exploring this legal opportunity,” Mr Hughes said.

Mr Hughes said the crime was reported to the NZ Police by the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, and the Police referred the case to the Maritime New Zealand. That was almost two months ago and there has been no word from NZ authorities.

“Mr Bethune did what our Government should have been doing which is standing up to illegal whaling. New Zealand needs to stand up for Mr Bethune and stand up for the whales,” Mr Hughes said.

“Our Government’s silence is disturbing. That it was silent on the ramming of the Ady Gil, and that it is silent on the plight of Pete Bethune illustrates a pervasive soft touch towards Japan’s whaling industry. The Government is selling New Zealander’s principles to the pro-whaling Japanese Government.

“John Key’s Government must assert a claim of New Zealand jurisdiction in this case and bring Pete home. If John Key maintains a weak stance towards Tokyo, the only remaining option will be to take Mr Bethune’s case to the International Court of Justice,” Mr Hughes said.

http://www.admiraltylawguide.com/conven/suppression1988.html

Australian based lawyer working in this field, Ronald Browne, has advised that New Zealand is a signatory to the Rome Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation.

This Convention was incorporated into New Zealand law through the Maritime Crimes Act 1999. Section 8 (1) of the Act specifies extra-territorial jurisdiction – that New Zealand law applies to acts committed against a ship in the high seas if that ship is registered in New Zealand.
Sea Cucumber

Imforthewhales – (or Iamaufo on the SS forum) – That’s really none of your business. But, if you must know, about a year or so.

Leonard Greene – Eeeh! Sorry Leonard, wrong guess. Would you like to go for Double Jeopardy where the scores can really change?

Imforthewhales – You quoted that “Consequently, the captain of the Shonan Maru could be charged under New Zealand law for a crime punishable by up to 14 years in prison”.

Well, he could, but he won’t be. New Zealand knows that they will absolutely not risk the mutually beneficial trade partnership with Japan over one idiotic numbskull, a numbskull that already killed one fisherman and injured others, while his insurance company paid their poor families off. Are you kidding me? Australia and New Zealand are doing the right thing – preserving good relations with another country that is performing a LEGAL research operation in the Southern Ocean, despite what a minority of the militant vegans have to say about it. Prepare to be disappointed! REALLY disappointed!!!

Oh, and it was such a blow that the EU didn’t go with the BF tuna trade ban. Man, that was really a shock, eh? You guys are really crying over that one on your forum. Too bad that will mean that when Paul Fatson gets to the Med, he’ll have more than just a few ships to contend with. They know he’s coming, and they will not let him interfere. No friendly ports nearby either….. Too bad the Ady Fail is at the bottom, becoming part of the Antarctic Reef Program! LOL! Maybe he could have run down the fishermen there like they did off of Guatemala. By the way, that country celebrated the sinking big time, as well they should! Yeah, and Canada and Greenland said that Polar Bears can continue to be hunted because it won’t affect the population by that much. I need a new seat cover for the back seat of my car – maybe a nice sealskin or white polar fur!

To Erik – keep dreaming Bud, no one is going to ride in and save Pete! Whaling isn’t on trial, the collision isn’t on trial – HE is! He’ll be convicted of the crimes listed and he’ll spend 2-3 years in prison for being stupid. I notice that Paul is off enjoying his freedom while Pete is learning to like his fried dolphin sandwiches that he can expect to enjoy for the next.. oh… 1095 days! In the end, he’ll be remembered as the murderer of a helpless fisherman, and petty criminal at the most.

All the remains now is for Chris to fix the engine on the Barker so they can take off as well, eh?
Bigbadpete

I,mmmm Baaack. Having spent the last two weeks in a quiet children freee caravan Park at the southern most tip of western australia, I,m back.
What a depressing scene of eco news I am greeted with, the sushi gluttons leading the charge to drive the northern bluefin to commercial extinction.

I said it before on the Sea Shepherd forum, and I’ll say it again….

I remember the rape of nankin,remember changi,remember the machinegunning of the australian nurses, remember the batann deathmarch, remember the burma railway, remember hellfire pass, remember the comfort women, remember sandarkin, I know my history, its a pity the Japanese don,t remember,
I have no love, respect, for this despicable race.

I hate a race that cannibalised and used Australian troops for bayonet practice, and until the truth about what the Imperial army did during world war 2 is taught openly to the japanese people and the whole sordid truth comes to light, I will continue to hate the bastards. For the sake of the innocents who suffered under the heel of the japanese THIS MUST NOT BE FOrGOTTON OR FORGIVEN anymore that what the NAZIS did to the Jews.

Mick

Bigbadpete,

“I have no love, respect, for this despicable race.”

Wow, racist much? Well, at least your more honest than most SS supporters and are up front about your racism.

Tlurie

Erik Brush, who is one of the main moderators at the Sea Shepherd forum just posted a link to an interview that he did – take a close look at the wetsuit he’s wearing and whose logo is on it…..

http://www.bant-shirts.com/interview/erik-brush.htm

For those of you who aren’t familiar with this logo – it’s Discovery Cove, in Orlando Florida. He went for a swim with the dolphins, as many tourists do. Now, that having been said, when the trainer was killed at Seaworld just recently, the Sea Shepherds were quick to start railing on the park and condemned all the tourists who do such things. It’s funny that he went for a swim with the dolphins, which is a pricey thing to do by the way, and I guess he kind of forgot, or maybe didn’t want anyone to know that Sea World and Discovery Cove are sister parks!

Just so everyone knows – that photo is not the result of a private visit with the dolphin as a “researcher – it’s a tourist photo that they take with every individual and you purchase on your way out.

From the Sea Shepherd Forum…..

Originally Posted by Albacore
Ok I know reading stuff is boring for some but I encourage you to read the report and understand the connection between sea parks and “dolphin drives”. When little John or Jenny wants to “swim with dolphins” she may be swimmimg with the sole survivor of a family butchered by fishermen following ” a traditional practise”.

Erik – did you have a nice time supporting Sea World and Discovery Cove?? What would Albacore say now??? Let’s see you try and justify this, if you can. If anyone even remotely questioned you on the forum, you’d delete the post and/or ban the person immediately, as you have done before. Believe it – this is going to get some publicity lots of other places!

Gee, what would Paul Watson say when told that one of his chief forum admins supports captive dolphins?

Hypocrites – no other word can describe it.
General Custard

I think someone forgot to take their medication.
Imforthewhales

Cucumber, what would your subversive anti everything group do if you told them that you have joined up for the green groups forums?

Would they think you were super freaky?

Or is this de rigueur behaviour for the anti environmentalist types?

Its obvious that you have no interest in the world or have woken up yet to what is going on within it. Despite all your championing of death to everything, i bet that you wouldn’t shoot your own dog for food, or wear its fur.

However you are doing a great job here cucumber. Its tops.

Despite you drawing conclusions which might appear to be a bit ” far out”, thats part of your charm … its always good to have someone like you playing the looney tunes crazy la la dude , because it brings some good discussion to the table, and creates a picture for the casual observer of just what the environment is up against.
Sea Cucumber

Imaufo,

Considering the lunacy that your own members have posted here, I would not be so quick to call anyone else crazy. Thanks! I think I’m doing a great job too – it seems that I have created some buzz in your forum and that there is some behind-the-scenes chatter to figure out who I am over there. I like it on the Sea Shepherd Forum… I can see all the craziness and stupidity that ensues every time you get some bad news, which has been a lot lately. Me? I’m just having fun. I have also seen that Gubbi is beating all your asses with the true facts and you guys just don’t like it. Geez – you had to tell everyone to stay calm on your forum when you posted because you already knew that the idiots there, like the posters above, simply can’t control themselves – that includes you. That whole “passive-aggressive” approach may fool some of *your* mindless supporters, but not anyone else. Good try, but no cigar!

I seriously doubt that you are in any position to tell me, or anyone else for that matter what is going on in the world as all you know are what Paul Watson tells you to think. That’s the problem with the Sea Shepherds, and all the other radical, hate-groups that exist – you believe that your way is the only way and anyone that questions you is immediately put down and brushed aside. You think you have the right to throw on a cape and a tin badge like your idiot friend Bethune, and just make up the rules as you go. You’re a victim of your own methodology, but it’s not really your fault. Being in a cult requires some programming, and from what I have seen, there is a lot of that going on.

Let me give you some reality – The bottom line is that the Sea Shepherds have no legal authority to do what you do. You interpreted the World Charter for Nature however you want as it fit in your agenda, and now you ride around like vigilantes. The rest of the world just sees you as a cult, a hate-group, or just a plain nuisance. You think you can order soverign nations around just because you don’t happen to like what they do. If Paul Watson is still going to the Med, watch what happens. I would think that theye’ll be less-forgiving than the Japanese!

I saw that the latest bit of buzz was that the Green Party filed a complaint against the SM2. Well, that’s really great! Want to know what going to happen? Not a damn thing. It’ll be brushed aside like a small gnat. Go back to Professor Roswell, or Rothwell, or whatever his name is and watch his arguments crumble as this plays out. We are talking about world trade partners who understand that their trade agreements are more important to one idiotic, petty criminal that is rightfully in jail, and despite what Erik Brush says, he’s not coming home anytime soon! Make no mistake – that’s all that Pete Bethune is – a petty criminal that is already responsible for the death of one person.

If you can’t see that maintaining good relations with other countries is a good thing, then you don’t know squat about anything in the world, but like most Sea Shepherds, you all claim to be experts.

After all your pathetic posturing, after all your pitiful antics, nothing much will come of it. Even the last couple of weeks of the campaign in the Antarctic was funny as well – the SM2 was just dragging you idiots around for no other reason except to see you scamper about. It was funny to follow on the news, and it will be even funnier when they air it on AP! It’ll also be good to see the Ady Gil get it’s nose job in Hi-Def, though! A bit less aerodynamic now, but I’m sure that the crabs and fish that occupy it now don’t mind!

Oh, by the way – as to the question of whether I would shoot and eat my dog? Not, not unless it was really cold and I was really hungry? There are many cultures around the world who actually eat dog, who are you to say that it is wrong to do so? Typical Sea Shepherd commentary – you don’t like it, therefore it is WRONG and no one must do it!

Why aren’t you bashing on Erik as noted above? He supports Sea World, and I thought that was taboo these days with you guys? Oh, because it’s a Sea Shepherd, it’s OK, right? Where’s your commentary on that

Typical – ignorant hypocrites. That’s your legacy – deal with it.

Come on, Iamaufo – thrill me with some more passive-aggressive commentary! Get you friends Grey Cell and MN Hope in here as well so they can spew the same racist, non-sensical rhetoric that we have seen of late.
Sea Cucumber

Iamaufo,

You wrote the following….

“well, if you can keep up with them and tackle them on their own terms…ie bombard them…then there is always the chance they will give up and surrender.”

I don’t think so. That’s a big “if” on your part. None of you can keep up any of the discussions on your own – you all lack the relevant facts, and just as you yourself said, the best thing to do is bombard anyone with all your foolhardy members. That’s why MN Hope had to beg for help in the Member Support section. So, you Grey Cell, and Lenzabi all take on multiple personas and spew the same, tired crap, that proves time and time again, that all you guys are interested in is making sure that others should bend to your will. It’s like the whales are incidental to the fact that if someone doesn’t agree with you, they are WRONG. Well, no Sea Shepherd in history has ever admitted that they were wrong about anything, and that is the purest sign of being a sociopath.

“I think we did a good job team.”

Again – I don’t think so – you ignore the basic facts and try and propagandize everything. You think the above postings are what you consider to be a “good job, team”? Well, thanks for proving here and now that you are truly a hate-group. Enough said on this one.

“Looks like sillycucumber is back ready for more.”

Boy, you really got me with that on – it really hurt! Wow – “Sillycucumber” is great – I’m sure you, Grey Cell, and MN Hope got kicks out of that one. You really showed me!

In all seriousness, there are some questions I would like some simple answers to, which are as follows:

Why isn’t anyone critical of Erik Brush for the above post? I read the bashing that Sea World took in your forum, but it looks pretty hypocritical to me that Erik would post a picture of himself smiling and playing with a captive dolphin, when it has been unilaterally condemned by Sea Shepherds. I know where that photo was taken, and I’m surprised to see a Sea Shepherd there. Just ask Albacore on your forum.

Why isn’t there any criticism for the NZ fishermen who have overfished the Antarctic Toothfish, which is prey for the Orca’s, that have been steadily disappearing from the area. Although the article states that too little is known now to say whether fishing is harming the orca, you know for a fact that if were some species being fished by Japan, you guys would have 6-7 pages already with fools bashing the Japanese. But, since it isn’t Japan, nothing is being said. I could quote from dozens of threads where just such things occurred.

I agree – hypocrite is the best word to describe it.

Imforthewhales

Form some reason you are against saving whales and letting them be…but as yet you haven’t let us in on the secret that lies deep within you what it is that is really troubling you.

People who are concerned about the state of the world are up against it, because, sadly ,there are more than a few people like you out there.

However, be happy little cucumber, because i have some good news for you. We don’t hate you cucumber…we adore you …simply because every time you post on these sites under whatever name take your fancy ….turns people away from the sad pathetic race of people that want to kill everything off on the planet for money.

Thats all good news.

You are obviously suffering cucumber and are being very emotional and reactive in your postings. You have lost control, which is a bad sign.

What i would like to know, in order to understand you further is…what are you really frightened of?

It is obvious to anyone reading your posts that you are lonely and scared…but scared of what exactly? Are you trying to protect something? as we are here? or do you have someting to hide?

You have gone to a lot of trouble, joining up with green groups websites and posting a lot of the same stuff on other sites.

You have spent time looking up posts, thinking that this might give you some sort of advantage,,,,but an advantage for what purpose? What exactly is your agenda?

You said you were having ” fun” on here…does this mean that you are just having fun and are not to be taken seriously? Or do you mean that by having fun you are just doing your best to have your own way here to suit whatever agenda it is that you are pursuing?
Imforthewhales

Why isn’t there any criticism for the NZ fishermen who have overfished the Antarctic Toothfish, which is prey for the Orca’s, that have been steadily disappearing from the area. Although the article states that too little is known now to say whether fishing is harming the orca, you know for a fact that if were some species being fished by Japan, you guys would have 6-7 pages already with fools bashing the Japanese. But, since it isn’t Japan, nothing is being said. I could quote from dozens of threads where just such things occurred.

I agree – hypocrite is the best word to describe it.

This just goes to show you how little you know about NZ fishing these days…most of it has been taken over by the Japanese. NZ have sold their fishing to the big fishing fleets that go around raping and pillaging.

Maybe you are happy with that state of affairs?

Perhaps though you should do a little research before posting.

BTW , it seems like you have changed your name from ramming speed, is this right?

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

So, now that I have been able to read your post, and look at it well, I see that you post like Rammingspeed5 or StopWatsonNow7 from AP.

You get very emotional in your attacks.

I do believe the picture that shows Erik with a porpoise is an old one, likely before he learned of the travesty that is Seaworld. So, you like to lurk or just read through over there, that is nice, same as any of the group from EET, yet you slink about not wanting to get banned there, but you do not like to allow anyone from there to go to your site to see what you have to say, seems one sided and hypocritical to me.

The Sea Shepherd forum is more open, and open minded than your EET site as it is so restrictive, oh yeah, support anything green and you list the person as “terrorist supporter” I suppose that you guys really are small frightened people that are afraid the world will take away your what? guns? ability to kill anything you want? Please, the whole thing about the CITES meeting was to try to reign in the over exploitation, so they failed to do so, they have basically shown that he kind of people who cannot control themselves from going overboard will use up everything and there will be none left for your kids or grandkids to have and enjoy. Very shortsighted if you ask me. Whatever happened to long range planning?

“The end of the line” should have been part of the mandatory viewing for the CITEs meeting.

Honestly, those of you out there who are able to be happy that the bans have not been set will one day have to answer your grand children or even your children as to why you did not help keep things from disappearing. The fact that anyone could be so happy about it all shows a low maturity level as well as short sightedness

ddpalmer

Yeah Australia and the EU should have supported the bans then they may have passed.

I haven’t seen anybody get banned from EET, but if names is all it takes to scare you away that sounds like more of your issue.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

No, I was curious, and someone allowed me to go onto EET based on their log in and both of us got banned, even though all I was doing was lurking, and not causing trouble. All I pointed out is that your site is more restrictive is all.
ddpalmer

So two people where using one login. That is one account so only one person got banned. If that is even what happened. I believe that accounts that just lurk ultimately get deleted or restricted.
Imforthewhales

I think Japan would have just ignored any bans by sites just as it ignores everything else.

So there are really only a couple of paths to go down.

Greater control over whats left of the tuna, or let Japan do its thing and wipe tuna off the face of the earth.
Mick

Leonard Greene,

“….and someone allowed me to go onto EET based on their log in and both of us got banned…”

To my knowledge, currently there has only been one person banned from EET; winpooh. Shortly after winpooh was given a temporary ban, someone attempted to login to EET from a IP address on the opposite side of the U.S. using her screen name and password. Because of this attempt to by-pass the ban, the unknown person’s, at that time, IP address was blocked. It is my understanding that you are free to sign up at EET anytime. All you have to do is sign up, like the other SS supporters that are on EET. You are welcome as long as you create your own account and not try to sneak around by using someone else’s.

Hellfire Jack

I run EET. I can tell you now we are FAR less restrictive than other sites.

Your friend Winpooh718 was given a 24 hour IP banned because she was acting suspicious and found to be using a bug to view posts outside of her membership. I fixed the bug and then her account logged in from across the country in an attempt to bypass the IP ban. She was then perma-banned along with the second IP she used to bypass her ban. She then went to cry on the SSCS boards about how much we hated and were afraid of her and how she asked me to remove her account several times (Never once did she ask any such thing.) She had one post on the boards. No one even responded to her.

You’re not correct about the terrorist supporter thing as well. You have to either be an actual terrorist supporter and/or post abusive or offensive things to gain that title. We have several people who talk about green topics all the time. No one gets restricted for having an opinion even if it’s 180° in the opposite of everyone else. Whaling IS a green topic.

Anyone is free to join the forums at http://www.endecoterrorism.com all you need is not use a throw away email account and not come from a proxy server. 99% of all comment and posting spam comes from proxy servers so… too bad for anyone who want’s to come spam us. That’s a plus for our members though. No spam. Let’s face it.. if you have to use a proxy and a throw away email to join a forum, you probably don’t want to actually be a member.

If anyone feels they were blocked from our forums wrongly they are free to email me from the site and plead their case. You can find my email on the main website.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

All of the nations should have heeded the science and supported the ban.
Sea Cucumber

Iamaufo,

Yeah, your highly predictable passive-aggressive response really got me this time – I feel so ashamed! Idiot!

Lenzabi,

Since, unlike your nitwit companion, you actually decide to answer the serious questions, I’ll bite – here are my follow-up responses. Your explanation of how Erik was not “aware of the travesty that is Sea World” doesn’t wash, and I’ll tell you why. Number 1, the picture of him looks fairly recent. Number 2, here’s what you have to do to swim with the dolphins like he did. He went in with a group of 6-8 people, and they were in the water about waist deep, and took turns giving the dolphins commands and took turns feeding them for doing tricks. Then each person in the water gets to go on a dolphin “ride”, which means the dolphin drags you while you hang on to the dorsal fin, and then you feed him for the trick. The last thing you do is to have an individual picture taken, again, feeding the dolphin for the trick, and then you’re done. They’ve been doing the same thing for years.

So, are you telling me that he wasn’t aware of this “travesty” before the recent attack at Sea World? Even *you* have to admit that your story makes no sense at all. He is now bashing it, and he was *participating* in what the rest of your membership was just bashing. He is supposed to be an intelligent person, and you say that he was oblivious to it before a few weeks ago that they kept these animals and did stuff like that with them? Really?

Of course I get passionate about stuff – because that’s what Paul Watson says to do – go look it up. And now you criticize me for doing what Paul Watson says? That doesn’t make any sense.

I know several people that got banned from your site for nothing more than being critical of Paul Watson. Now, before you say that they were trolls – some of them may have been, but not all were. So, don’t even try and say that your forum is so open to all points of view – it’s not. You won’t admit it, but the evidence shows that your admins are trigger-happy with the ban-stick. I will give you this though, perhaps that is a knee-jerk reaction to the trolling, which I do see happening, so I’ll concede a half-point on that one if you do.

Do you even understand why that even other anti-whaling individuals don’t agree with your tactics? Because we live in a society of laws, and that’s because we have elected officials that supposedly represent the people. Much of the time, it works, but not always. When it doesn’t, most democracies allow for voting in other elected officials that will do what the others didn’t do. If they don’t, we go through it again. That having been said – no one, and I repeat NO ONE has the right to take the law into their own hands and do what the Sea Shepherds are doing in the Southern Ocean.

Despite what you think, I am actually anti-whaling – something which has caused some angst even with my fellow posters. I don’t care – I have my view of whaling and they do as well. I respect them for what they think, even if it differs from mine. That’s the difference between you and I, and the difference between the EET folks and the Sea Shepherds. You won’t allow for any other point of view besides your own. Yes, I do research in your forum, and you know this also, so you know that I could easily come up with countless examples that prove this again and again. I don’t see why you have a problem with this, Paul Watson follows the Japanese into the Southern Ocean, and I followed you to see what you’re up to – what’s the difference? Again, why criticize me for what Paul does himself?

If I thought for a minute that we could have an intelligent, private conversation, I would PM you on your forum. But right now, I’m pretty sure that as soon as I did, I would find my membership suddenly gone because I dared to openly question something that anyone of a right mind would consider to be hypocrisy. I’d be open to a conversation, though, without Iamaufo, because he’s still an idiot.
Sea Cucumber

Lenzabi,

Oh, by the way, I don’t have any guns, so I don’t know what you’re talking about. Also, I am not much concerned about what we tell our grandchildren because of two things” One – If the Mayans are right, we only have about two and a half years anyways, and Two – according to Erik, we only have about 20 years before the Earth melts down anyway. As far as I’m concerned, I am living every day like it was a weekend day! THAT’S why I am having fun! That’s my agenda!

By the way, tell Erik he’s got one part wrong, and that is that eventually the Earth will go through a magnetic pole shift, and when it does, nothing will prevent the solar winds from blowing away our atmosphere. There won’t be any life left to create any ozone.

Imforthewhales

Well its obvious from those poorly scripted replies neither of the bum chums has any interest in the topics at all really.

Bum chums..you make it impossible for anyone to take you aeven remotely seriously.

Cucumber, you really are a car aren’t you? You remind me of a few Canadian sealers that are out there trashing people interested in saving whats left. I know how they post, just like you. Erratic, emotional, stirring the pot…nothing to do? Must be a cold spring.

Imforthewhales

no one, and I repeat NO ONE has the right to take the law into their own hands and do what the Sea Shepherds are doing in the Southern Ocean.

hmmm…another bit of psychotic rambling from the great cucumber.

You really need to get over yourself.

Cucumber…no-one has the right to bend the laws to suit themselves and make fools of the world by lying about what they are doing. Obviously you have been sucked in BIG TIME cucumber if you go along with your puppet masters, the Japanese whalers. How stupid are you? Nothing on earth could be more stupid than that.

In the meantime,,,if you don’t like the laws that allow SS to go ahead and stop these industrial rapists of the oceans then go and get the words changed at the UN. So far, no-one has and the UN charter for nature stays in place. Untill then, Japanese whaling ships are not allowed to call into any Australian ports…including Antartica…that goes for the French as well…

So until you manage to get the words changed its bad luck for you and your bum chum DD palmer. you might have better luck making a difference elsewhere because you are going to be pretty useless tackling the whaling issue.
Imforthewhales

Despite what you think, I am actually anti-whaling – something which has caused some angst even with my fellow posters. I don’t care – I have my view of whaling and they do as well. I respect them for what they think, even if it differs from mine. That’s the difference between you and I, and the difference between the EET folks and the Sea Shepherds

You have a very strange way of showing your support for the whales then cucumber. What exactly are you doing about the problem if you are so pro-whales?

Imforthewhales

Specifically the Court ruled that:

1. THE COURT DECLARES that the respondent has killed, injured, taken and interfered with Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) and fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) and injured, taken and interfered with humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229, 229A, 229B and 229C of the
Interesting comment part 2 of the finding of the Australian federal court against the Japanese whalers calling for them to be restrained.

*********************************************************

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth), (the “Act”), and has treated and possessed such whales killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229D and 230 of the Act, without permission or authorisation under sections 231, 232 or 238 of the Act.

2. THE COURT ORDERS that the respondent be restrained from killing, injuring, taking or interfering with any Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis), fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) or humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, or treating or possessing any such whale killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, unless permitted or authorised under sections 231, 232 or 238 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

ddpalmer

Yeah that is what the court ruled. Now if Australia could just get the world to recognize their claim to the Australian Whale Sanctuary, then the ruling would have some effect.

Just like Argentina claims the Falkland Islands but I bet if you go there you wont find the Argentine flag or Argentine laws.

A country can claim whatever it wants but if the international community doesn’t recognize their claim then their claim has no practical meaning.

Michael Raymer

People, can we please keep our eye on the ball? Watson said this, Bethune did that, look I have a picture of this guy doing this. Who freakin’ cares?!? Can you all please take a step back and look at yourselves for just one moment?

Cruelty and inhumanity is happening all around us. Kids are getting molested and murdered, Africans are being killed by the thousands, North Koreans actually think that they have a leader that they can be proud of…. and our oceans are dying. Whales, dolphins, sea turtles, bluefin, cod, halibut… they are all going away, because of us. Y’know what? I love sushi. Love it. I’d like to love it tomorrow too. And that means that the entire environment needs to sustain all the species that we, as individuals, want to enjoy in the future. It also means that we need to take a hard look at ourselves, how we perceive the world around us, and what we are willing to allow; not from others, but from ourselves.

Cruelty is cruelty. Period. Having spent just a small amount of time on this board, I am willing to try an re-define what I think of a cruel. Or, I would if it wasn’t for the extremes and motives of those who try to make their arguments of what is and isn’t cruel.

To me, whaling is an outdated practice, a form of cruelty against a species that suffers from it, and a form of hunting that genuinely harms the planet. As for the personalities on each side of this issue, screw them all. I don’t care what they said, what they did in the past, where they got their picture taken or who they had it taken with. I care about today and tomorrow. That’s it. I will debate, I will argue, I will discuss. But, I won’t change my mind and I have no illusions about changing yours either.

Mick

Michael Raymer,

“To me, whaling is an outdated practice, a form of cruelty against a species that suffers from it, and a form of hunting that genuinely harms the planet.”

“But, I won’t change my mind and I have no illusions about changing yours either.”

Fair enough. I appreciate and respect your position. It has never been my intention to change someones views about whaling. I understand and have no problem with someone being anti-whaling. My problem lies with SS and anyone else who uses their anti-whaling views to justify attacking other people in order to force their views on them. I believe people have every right to be against whaling, I believe they have every right to voice their opposition and work within the boundries of the law in order to change the law. However, they do not have the right to illegaly attack people and break the law simply because they oppose whaling. It’s as simple as that.

Michael Raymer

Hello Mick,

Thanx for you reasoned response. I think the end-point that the pro Sea Shepherd faction here (and elsewhere) is trying to make is that the boundaries of the law have proven to be ridiculously ineffective. The Southern Ocean pretty much classifies as the most remote part of the Earth. There is no law enforcement, and some would argue that there is no law. Whatever happens in Tokyo, Geneva, Brussels or wherever the next IWC meeting gets held, there is absolutely nothing stopping a fleet of ships (from Japan or anywhere else) from conducting a whaling operation in this region. Nothing whatsoever. The Japanese themselves have made it abundantly clear that their whaling operations will continue regardless of who tells them to stop.

So you or someone else, please tell me (and I am asking this respectfully and constructively), what can any of us do to stop, or at least place a temporary moratorium on commercial whaling WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LAW? (I just re-read this, I thought about back-spacing it out, but I’ll leave it there) Or I should ask: Is there a law that could be passed, where whaling is prohibited, that would actually be obeyed?

I think this is the central theme. Frustration. When the law does not serve, some people will take the law into their own hands. This happened in America during the late 1800′s when owning and exploiting slaves was fully within the law in the southern states. Certain people said, “Enough”, and took the law into their own hands. Every last one of them had their flaws and character defects, but they stood against injustice, because the law would not.

Watson, Bethune, you, me and everyone we admire and revile has good things and bad things that can be pointed too (believe me, a character assassin would make some easy money coming after me). But when one genuinely feels that the cause is just, and no one else will do it, one must carry it out one’s own self. This is where Sea Shepherd comes in. Sure, there are flaws and defects. No one has a perfect track record. But how is their cause served by standing outside an embassy waving a sign?

Y’know, I am reminded of an episode (or excerpt, I saw it, but can’t remember where) where a crew member constructed a pneumatic cannon to shoot (or lob) butyric acid bottles farther than they can be thrown (and it worked). Watson’s comment on it was that it LOOKED like a weapon and therefore was probably not a good idea. That buys him some forgiveness, whatever else he has “done wrong”.

These are people just trying to get results, and trying to draw attention to a cause that they genuinely believe in. If there is a better way, please clue us all in, but they have to include RESULTS.

One last point and then I’m going to bed. And for what it’s worth, I’ve made this point before. If whale hunting is eliminated, who starves? If this immoral practice (in my opinion) is halted today, who suffers? And don’t answer with the whalers themselves. Seasoned seafarers who have Antarctic experience won’t have any problems finding other work. So, who suffers? What children will go to bed hungry? What parents will worry?
ddpalmer

“Y’know, I am reminded of an episode (or excerpt, I saw it, but can’t remember where) where a crew member constructed a pneumatic cannon to shoot (or lob) butyric acid bottles farther than they can be thrown (and it worked). Watson’s comment on it was that it LOOKED like a weapon and therefore was probably not a good idea. That buys him some forgiveness, whatever else he has “done wrong”.”

And I am reminded of this year when the decided to use the exact same thing that they rejected in that episode you mention. When their methods of that year don’t work they just up their actions to levels that they rejected in previous years. At this rate they will be using firearms in a year or two.
Mick

Michael Raymer,

Thank you for your clear response.

“…the boundaries of the law have proven to be ridiculously ineffective.”

I disagree that the law has been ineffective. Quite the contrary. It has been very effective. The IWC has made commercial whaling in the SO illegal and due to that commercial whaling has ceased in the SO. The IWC allows scientific research whaling in the SO and Japan is doing so within the boundries set by the IWC.

“Is there a law that could be passed, where whaling is prohibited, that would actually be obeyed?”

I sure that there is a law that could be passed. However, it would require the approval of all the countries involved and would need to be based on science and logic, not emotion.

“Frustration. When the law does not serve, some people will take the law into their own hands.”

I don’t think comparing slavery to whaling is valid. Slavery dealt with people. Whaling is about animals. I see your point about taking the law into your own hands. However, if you allow some people to do that, then everyone will feel free to do so. Then laws become pointless and you are left with anarchy.

“But when one genuinely feels that the cause is just, and no one else will do it, one must carry it out one’s own self. This is where Sea Shepherd comes in.”

That is the crux of the matter. Inevitably people and countries will have disagreements. That is why we have laws, treaties and agreements. To work out differences of opinion without violence. When you allow someone to ignore the law because they feel strongly about something then everyone will demand the right to do so. Where does it end? Who decides when it’s okay to ignore the law and when it’s not? Once again, you are left with anarchy.

“If there is a better way, please clue us all in, but they have to include RESULTS.”

The system of laws, treaties and agreements is the best we have, at this time. While it my not be perfect, it works fairly well and is far better than anarchy.

“If whale hunting is eliminated, who starves?”

As far as I know, if whale hunting is stopped, some people in Russia, Alaska, Greenland and various small islands would possibly starve. I do not believe anyone in Japan would starve if whale hunting were to cease.
Now, you apparently feel that is reason enough to demand that Japan stop hunting whales. Your logic appears to be they should stop eating whale because many people are against whaling and because no one will starve. Is that right?
If so, Muslims could equally demand that Americans stop eating pork for the same reasons. Hindus could equally demand that Americans stop eating cows.
Please allow me to ask you a question. How does someone in Japan eating a whale affect you personally? In what way does it affect your life? I would like a specific answer, please. Not some vague reference to the environment.

In summary, I personally think whales are ugly and nothing more than the ocean equivalent of a cow. As long as they can be sustainably hunted, then I have no problem with eating them.
Imforthewhales

However, they do not have the right to illegaly attack people

Mick…Sea Sheperd do not attack people.

There is a massive difference between stopping illegal japanese whale poachers through variuous means which might include blockading a ship or suing rotten butter.

Let us not forget that japan needs to realise one thing…they are not welcome in Antartica with their grenade tipped harpoons and silly commercial whaling loopholes.

SS are very effective in cutting down profits for the illegal japanese commercial whalers, however, SS respct life, wen the life of a lowly whaler, SS are hardly going to start using firearms and to insinuate that they might in the future has no basis, is untruthful, slanderous, preposterous, provocative not to mention dangerous to comment in this manner as a japanese whaler might very well be reading this, take a gun with him to Antartica in preparation and be prepared to shoot to kill.

Provocative comments and statements such as your wayward comment above could in fact get someone killed.

That is not being a scaremonger, just look at how far the japanese whalers are prepared to go…you can forget about vote buying for a second .they very nearly took out 6 crew on the SS boat the Ady Gil this year, cutting it in two and who knows what the whalers might try next time.

You need to be more careful and think about what you say in future.
ddpalmer

Throwing glass bottles at people isn’t illegally attacking them?
From MN, with hope…

Nope, as much as you want to believe, throwing glass bottles at people isnt illegal. I could throw a glass bottle at someone and they wouldnt call the police on me. Besides, the Sea Shepherd activists dont try to hit the people, they try to hit the decks.
ddpalmer

Sorry as much as you want it to be legal it is at the very least assault and could be assault with a deadly weapon.

And Sorry a second time. The Sea Shepherds say they don’t try and hit people but there are numerous times, like any time they throw from a RHIB at the Nisshin Maru, were they can’t see where the bottles will land so it is impossible for them to know if there is anybody in the impact area. They can say whatever they want but their own videos prove that they are lying.
From MN, with hope…

Yes, I do know that when they are in the RHIBs that they cant see anything, in fact I previously said that when they were in the RHIBs that they could just hope that they dont hit anyone. They TRY not to hit anyone, but since its not a chemical that can harm humans, if the whalers get hit, it’ll hurt maybe, and sure it may bruise, but the bottles wont break upon contact with humans, the bottles will ‘bounce’ off the people, then fall to the deck, chances are with little damage. Now notice, I said TRY. Try means, they attempt not to. Try doesnt mean that they always do. If they can see the whalers, they dont aim for them. Then again, if you have ever thrown something you would know that things like weather, spin, follow-through, force behind throw, and so on can affect the items trajectory, so you could intend not to hit someone, but the wind could hit it, and push it towards the person.
ddpalmer

Try means make an attempt. They don’t make an attempt when they throw them blindly.

And what is your basis for saying a thrown bottle, much less one from their slingshot or compressed gas launcher, “if the whalers get hit, it’ll hurt maybe, and sure it may bruise, but the bottles wont break upon contact with humans, the bottles will ‘bounce’ off the people, then fall to the deck, chances are with little damage.”
Imforthewhales

DD fact is SS have yet to cause an injury to anyone…including the whalers. You talk about assault with deadly weapons…hats just what the Japanese are doing to the whales.

The Japanese keep trying to pin sea Sheperd down, claiming this and that. This year they claimed that all on board including les Captitan all got acid in their eyes and needed surgery, life support and two years worth of counselling. Yet the videos show them firing capsicum spray into their own faces…keystone cops style, or was that Laurel and Hardey? .

Les incompetants!

I hope that they include this episode on whale wars 3. It is just another example of how silly the Japanese claims are who hide behind mummys skirts and cry like babies whenever they cant get their own way.

BTW…when the Japanese whaler who couldn’t take the suffering of the whales anymore and jumped overboard into the icy depths of the Southern Ocean
who was it that helped search for the missing body?

Yes thats right Sea Sheperd searched the area alongside the Japanese ( who claimed that they didn’t want any help from the ” eco terrorists”)

Perhaps if the Japanese whalers had not been so stubborn and incalcitrant they might have found the poor man and there is always the small chance that his life might have been saved if found in time.

Unfortunatly for his poor soul, the Japanese whalers finished him off good and proper.

So next time you talk about lives in danger, just remember who is treating human ( and cetacean) life with contempt down in the Southern Ocean.

_
Mick

imforthewhales,

“Mick…Sea Sheperd do not attack people.”

“…between stopping illegal japanese whale poachers..”

“..cutting down profits for the illegal japanese commercial whalers..”

Throwing glass bottles, filled with acid, at people is attacking them. It is assult and illegal.

You, yourself acknowledged that there has been no international court ruling declaring the ICR’s operartion in the SO, illegal. Therefore, they are operating legally and are not “poaching”.

The ICR isn’t making ANY profit to “cut down”. That’s why it is partially funded with government subsidies. The money the ICR makes from the sale of whale meat goes to pay for SOME, not all, of the cost of the research.
ddpalmer

“BTW…when the Japanese whaler who couldn’t take the suffering of the whales anymore and jumped overboard into the icy depths of the Southern Ocean
who was it that helped search for the missing body?”

How far up Paul’s fat ass did you stick your head to come up with this gem?

Care to show some proof? Maybe Paul can send it to you with your next check?
From MN, with hope…

Its a compressed air T-shirt cannon, which is designed not to hurt people, in fact the air cannons dont shoot the bottles, they almost ‘lob’ them over the nets, so they have little force behind them. As for the slingshots, again they try to shoot over the nets, so most momentum in the bottles is used getting them over the nets. Besides, if the whalers arent smart enough to stay clear, and watch the sky, when they know that bottles will come down upon their ship, then well they really shouldnt even be out on the ships decks.

As far as the whaler who went overboard (not the lightest way to put it…) Sea Shepherd were the only guys out there with a helicopter, and they offered to help, despite their dwindling fuel, but the whalers turned down their help. That chopper couldve helped go far distances, searching for the man, but no. The whalers turned down the help.
Abe

Let me drop a bottle on your head from 30 feet and tell me how much it tickles.
Mick

imforthewhales,

“…when the Japanese whaler who couldn’t take the suffering of the whales anymore and jumped overboard into the icy depths of the Southern Ocean..”

That is a truly despicable, disgusting and reprehensible thing to say.
ddpalmer

Besides, if the Ady Gil’s crew wasn’t smart enough to stay clear, and watch the ocean, when they know that ships will come at their ship, then well they really shouldnt even be out on the Antarctic ocean.
From MN, with hope…

ddp, I think that your post was meant somewhere else. Abe, it will hurt, but chances are the glass wont break. Mick, I do agree that there was a better way to put that…

Imforthewhales

Well said Michawl Raymer.

A half a century ago, a ship’s physician on a whaling trip in the Antarctic wrote the following description:

“If we can imagine a horse having two or three explosive spears stuck in its stomach and being made to pull a butcher’s truck through the streets of London while it pours blood into the gutter, we shall have an idea of the method of killing. The gunners themselves admit that if whales could scream, the industry would stop for nobody would be able to stand it.”

whales are being killed, their living flesh torn from their bodies. They are being electrocuted for up to twenty minutes to kill them as their heads are submerged beneath the sea. Imagine the agony of being drowned and electrocuted at the same time as your body pours hot pulsing blood into a cold sea from a gaping wound, and your body is riddled with burning shrapnel from the grenade tipped projectile that exploded with unimaginable pain, shredding your organs yet not killing you.

The killing of an endangered species is a crime against nature and it is a crime against humanity.

Mick

imforthewhales,

“The killing of an endangered species is a crime against nature and it is a crime against humanity.”

Minke whales are not endangered. However, the Bowhead whales that America kills are endangered.

Imforthewhales

you can add to that fin whales etc that Japan do kill and import from places such as Norway and Iceland.

Mick

imforthewhales,

“…..import from places such as Norway and Iceland.”

You are incorrect. Norway does not hunt Fin whales. Last year I believe Japan killed one Fin whale and Iceland killed 150 Fin whales. Yet there were no SS’s to save the Fin whales in Iceland.

Imforthewhales

Japan imports fin whales from Iceland.

Whilst Norway does not hut fin whales they are still catching whales and selling to Japan.

Hvalur hf is an Icelandic whale meat company.
They are hunting fin whales for the Japanese markets.

They claim to be exporting 1,500 tonnes to Japan. They have a quota of 150 fin whales. They are also catching minke whales… I believe Norway is also on the Japanese sushi gravy train. The Icelandic whale meat company has admitted that whale meat from Norway is being sold in japan…Norway specializes in Minke whales.

They reckon there are only 30,000 fin whales left in the North Atlantic ( a large proportion of these in the Mediterranean).

Fin whales are listed as an endangered species.

Fin whales are the second largest species of whale and the second largest animal ever to have lived.

So whilst japan only caught one fin whale themselves, it appears as if they are killing many more.
Mick

imforthewhales,

“So whilst japan only caught one fin whale themselves, it appears as if they are killing many more.”

No, ICELAND is killing “many more” Fin whales, not Japan. And SS is doing nothing about it. It also does not change the fact that America is killing endangered Bowhead whales, as well.
Imforthewhales

No, ICELAND is killing “many more” Fin whales, not Japan. And SS is doing nothing about it. It also does not change the fact that America is killing endangered Bowhead whales, as well.

Mick, i think it is not a co-incidence that the Icelandic fin whale hunt is processing more and more fin whales and this is probably consistent with demand coming from japan. The icelandic whaling companies have expressed high hopes for the future of whale meat trade with japan.

Japan might not be physically firing the harpoons themselves but its hard to deny that Icealand is very interested in fin whale trade with japan and see this as a profitable industry (where few exist at the present time in Iceland, what with it being broke and all). Therefore japan is in fact killing these whales because they are paying for the bulk of the Icelandic fin whale hunting.

The driving force for Icelandic whaling appears to be Japan.

You have complained that SS appear to be doing nothing about Icelandic whaling.

I believe in years past that the campaign against Iceland has been strong, and Sea Sheperd claim that they helped shut down all whaling in Iceland for a decade or more.

Now you cant be in three areas at once and SS is just one small outfit with limited resources. Sea Sheperd probably take the view that the best way to shut down Icelandic whaling is to shut down Japanese whaling. Thats my view anyway, but if they were to tackle Icelandic whaling more directly in some fashion then that would also be a good thing imo.
ddpalmer

The way I see it the SSCS is causing the increase in Icelandic whaling.

The restaurants and grocery stores in Japan have a demand for whale meat. Japan’s research whaling is able to meet some of that demand. But by reducing the whales caught by Japan the SSCS is decreasing the supply so the Japanese restaurants and grocery stores have to look elsewhere for a supply. Iceland is one of the few other countries with a reservation in CITES for whales, so they are a natural supplier.

So an argument could easily be made that by reducing Japan’s take of non-endangered Minke whales the SSCS is causing an increase in Iceland’s take of endangered Fin whales.

Iceland’s whaling season is the exact opposite time of year from the Antarctic whaling season. So the previous years the SSCS and their boat have not been active during the time of the Icelandic hunt and could have been using their direct action techniques against the Icelandic whalers.

Imforthewhales

Mick, my undestanding is that the American bowhead whaling is done for susbistance purposes by native Americans..the original inhabitants. Whilst i find this concerning, and I do not condone this slaughter of endangered bowhead whales…there are allowances for subsistance whaling around the world 9 as well as of rother animal species such as dugongs in Australia).

These hunts are small and non comercial in nature. They are liited ot the native peoples. They are not killing these whales in the name of ( inecessary, false) research and they are not killing bowhead whales commercially for profit. Unlike Japan, they are using traditional methods to hunt the whales, which is probably just as cruel as any other method, but has to be seen as far more cultural than the Japanese claims of cultural whaling. After a whale is caught, the Captain of the boat and his wife distribute the whalemeat to the crew and to mebers of the community.

My understanding is that these whales are used for food in areas where food is not always available ( Alaskan coastal regions )and are used to support the local population. Rather than a commercial company trying to maximise profits arriving with their million dollar ships and high powered guns, these groups of native people hunt from traditional boats made of skins and share the whale meat amongst the community to help them surivive very long, very cold winters. The native people also only take what the community needs for survival.

Mick

imforthewhales,

“Mick, my undestanding is that the American bowhead whaling is done for susbistance purposes by native Americans..”

“These hunts are small and non comercial in nature.”

“..these groups of native people hunt from traditional boats made of skins..”

You are generally correct. The number of Bowhead whales taken is smaller than the numbers of Minke whales taken by the ICR. However, they take a higher percentage of the total population than the ICR does. They are also allowed to sell native handicrafts made from whales to anyone, even non-natives. So, the hunt is commercial, to a very small degree.
This is incorrect. They use modern boats and explosive grenades in their hunt. Here is a brochure from NOAA on the subject.

http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/protectedresources/whales/bowhead/bowheadbrochure07.pdf
Imforthewhales

I find it sad that they are hunting these whales…especially so that these whales appear on endangered species lists.

However this does appear to be done for community benefit and survival, even the selling of trinkets would be for community benefit. It is not a whaling industry per se. I see that the captain of the whaling boat is not allowed to be paid for his services either.
Mick

imforthewhales,

“I find it sad that they are hunting these whales…especially so that these whales appear on endangered species lists.”

“However this does appear to be done for community benefit and survival…”

By the way, I want to make it clear that I fully support the whale hunt in Alaska.

Now then, you stated in an earlier post that hunting endangered whales was a “crime against nature” and that whale hunting was “the most cruel form” of hunting. Yet, you appear to be making an exception for the native whale hunt in Alaska.
To criticize Japan for killing whales by saying it is “cruel”, “inhumane” and “a crime against nature” but then making an exception for the native whale hunt is hypocritical, to say the least. If it is “cruel” for one group of people to hunt them then it is equally “cruel” for another group to hunt them.

Imforthewhales

Interesting.

After the July 2000 IWC meeting, Dominica’s Fisheries Minister, Atherton Martin, made headlines around the globe when he resigned in disgust from his government post, denouncing what he declared was:

“Japan’s outright extortion and the use of bribes to win
third world countries’ votes for pro-whaling interests.”

Japan has given the small island of Dominica (with a population of just 77,000 people) more than $7 million for fisheries facilities since it joined the IWC.

According to Martin, “Japanese officials had visited the Prime Minister and had threatened to withdraw aid for a new fisheries complex if Dominica abstained on the critical sanctuary issue.” Martin went on to say that five other islands—Grenada, St. Vincent, St. Lucia, Antigua, and St. Kitts and Nevis—also have “succumbed to the same extortionary tactics of Japan.” As Martin put it: “Frankly they [the Japanese] are relentless, very pushy and aggressive, and I think a lot of our governments cave in.”

ddpalmer

You do realize that is how all governments work? They give aid to countries that do things they like and threaten to remove the aid if the country does things that the donor country doesn’t like.

You do remember that the US used similar tactics to get Japan to sign the moratorium in the first place? And that the same tactics were used to get countries to join the IWC expressly to vote for the moratorium.

Imforthewhales

DDP what the Japanese doing is vote buying..they buy the votes of smaller, poorer nations than themselves in order to gain influence.

They tend to do this using fisheries aid and building things such as wharves ( then calling such wharf a name such as togo- japanese friendship wharf) .

As far as i know, USA used its muscle on japan to stop commercial whaling and agree to a moratoriuum. howver no money changed hands as far as i was aware, perhaps you know differenntly…and Japan got its way yet again via the research loophole.

I doubt there can be a more blatent example of vote buying than that engaged in by Japan.

At last count there were 22 countries receiving japanese aid. When, in 2006, the IWC passed the pro-whaling “St Kitts Declaration”, two-thirds of the countries voting for it had received fisheries aid from Japan. According to Greenpeace, these countries have received 470 million US since 2004.

Public statements from Japanese officials:

“Because anti-whaling countries’ attitudes are stubborn, it is judged that it is more advantageous for future negotiations to dig up supporting votes by increasing member countries than by trying to split opposing votes.”

– Hiroaki Kameya, Japan’s Vice Minister of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries, reported by Kyodo News, 2 June 1999
Imforthewhales

Japan has denied claims it is paying the expenses of countries in return for their support at the International Whaling Commission (IWC).

ABC TV’s Four Corners program tonight reveals specific details of favours handed out by Japan to countries in the Caribbean and Pacific in exchange for support.

The former IWC representative for Solomon Islands says his country had its membership paid by Japan for at least 10 years and the program has also obtained a letter from Grenada’s Government showing Japan covered all its expenses.

Grenada’s former IWC commissioner Michael Baptiste was charged for allegedly pocketing the money in 2002 and he says such “vote buying” does occur.

“I would get to an airport and someone would meet you at the airport and pay for your expenses and give you money for your expenses,” he said.

‘”I can’t say it’s the Government of Japan because they wouldn’t identify themselves, but individuals would do so, yes.”

The tiny Caribbean nation of Dominica has been a member of the IWC since 1992 and for the past five years has used its IWC vote to support Japan’s efforts to resume commercial whaling.

Dominica’s former environment minister told Four Corners that he resigned from his position in 2000 after Japan allegedly bought his Government’s vote with aid.

Atherton Martin says he had convinced his Cabinet not to vote with Japan in the IWC but that the then prime minister overturned in the decision because Japan said there would be no more aid without the vote.

“I don’t think the international legal community has come up with a term yet to describe this blatant, purchasing of small country governments by Japan,” he said.

“I mean, that has to go down in legal history as being at the high end of public sector extortion.

“I felt if it was that easy for a foreign government to walk into my country and with the promise of aid to get a cabinet decision to be reversed, in complete defiance of the elements of trust and comradeship that exists in the cabinet, that is not a process that I wanted to be a part of.

“I felt it was unfair to me as an individual, to the institution of government, and most importantly it was unfair to the people of Dominica.”

Japan denies allegations of buying the votes of smaller poorer nations and IWC delegate Joji Morishita says he will look into the claims.

“I don’t believe that happened,” he said.

“That’s a serious allegation I guess and we will look at this issue.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200507/s1416208.htm

So even japan admits that this is a serious issue.
But you don’t DD palmer?
ddpalmer

“After these amendments were passed in the mid-1980′s, the Reagan Administration asked Japan to comply with the IWC moratorium on whaling or face trade sanctions and loss of fishing rights in U.S. waters. Japan stood to lose a million-ton Alaskan pollock fishery if it did not comply.

After further negotiations, Japan finally agreed to withdraw its objection to the moratorium. Thus, the moratorium on commercial whaling went into effect in 1986. Later, the United States ended up phasing out the fish allocation, an unforeseen loss for Japan.”

So no the US didn’t pay Japan they threatened to cut off a multi-million dollar industry and when Japan gave in they cut them off anyway.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/03/04/japans_hunt_for_whaling_rights?page=full

“Those countries that have joined the IWC recently and voted with Japan have also been more likely to see increases in Japanese bilateral aid receipts. For instance, Antigua & Barbuda and St. Kitts & Nevis, both of which were on the panel behind last month’s decision, have received around $40 more in per capita aid from Japan since joining the IWC.

But two sides can play at this game. As it turns out, IWC membership is an even more powerful predictor of decreases in British aid receipts and the combined aid receipts from France, Germany, and the United States. Even more strikingly, the net effect of becoming a pro-whaler on total turns out to be negative. In other words, punishments from the anti-whaling donors are larger than rewards from Japan.

This raises the question of why countries do join Japan’s side. There are many untestable explanations such as additional unobserved side payments. However, the foreign-aid data itself also offers a partial explanation. Foreign aid can be divided into loans that need to be paid back and grants that do not. Japanese foreign aid increases are almost entirely in grant form, which developing countries prefer, while the aid reductions from anti-whalers come almost entirely from loans. It is hard to know what the effects on recipient-country welfare might be.”

So apparently countries LOSE money by siding with Japan.

“RUDOLPH: But Japan is not alone. Nor was it the first to try to make friends and influence votes on the IWC. Dr. Tillman and others claim that in the years just before the vote on the worldwide moratorium, conservation groups paid some small island nations to join the Commission.

TILLMAN: There was what we called “common knowledge,” quote unquote, that a number of countries joined and that their dues and the travel support was reportedly due to conservation groups providing it. So that, in a sense, one could say that the conservation groups set out a strategy that the Japanese copied.”

http://www.loe.org/shows/shows.htm?programID=98-P13-00019#feature4

And Japan seems to have said they are “serious allegations” not “serious issues”.

Where did I deny that Japan gives aid to countries that back it’s policies? I said that countries tend to give money/aid to countries that support them and decrease the money/aid to countries that do things that the donor country doesn’t like.

Michael Raymer

Mick,

I had to jump down here due to the lack of a reply bar.

“Now, you apparently feel that is reason enough to demand that Japan stop hunting whales. Your logic appears to be they should stop eating whale because many people are against whaling and because no one will starve. Is that right?”

That is not my logic at all. I couldn’t care less who else or how many other people are against whaling.(BTW, I’m answering your questions in my terms, not getting defensive or hostile) I am against it because I genuinely believe that there are too many un-answered questions about the intelligence, depth of feeling and capacity for suffering of cetaceans. Their intelligence does not have to be “our kind” of intelligence. It just has to be intelligence. Depth of feeling, of suffering, despair, remorse. We simply don’t know how deep it goes. Look up Cetacean intelligence on Wikipedia and they’ll tell you that whales have not been researched adequately because of the difficulties and expense involved. And then there is the suffering. Please do not tell me that the whalers methods are humane. I’ve seen too many videos of whales being harpooned with the current methods.

I am a meat and fish eater. I support regulated, lawful hunting of elk, deer, ducks, quail, etc. I shop for beef, chicken, pork, etc. I am confident in the fact that these particular animals are not possessed of a sentience or intelligence that makes this a moral problem. I am also confident that (abuses and incompetance aside) they are being killed as humanely as possible. Vegan assertions aside, I believe that these animal products are necessary to feed the worlds population, at least for the forseeable future. In this as in all things, if someone ever changes my mind, my mind will be changed and I will act accordingly.

“Please allow me to ask you a question. How does someone in Japan eating a whale affect you personally? In what way does it affect your life? I would like a specific answer, please. Not some vague reference to the environment.”

Many people don’t think that whales should be equated with people. I will not deny that I do, at least in degrees. Again, if the taking of these animals is causing them the pain and suffering that I honestly believe that it does, then it is just plain wrong. If we are hunting species that have a conscious thought process, an awareness of self, a capacity to feel loss when they witness a mate or their offspring being killed, then it is just plain wrong. No one has been able to make these determinations, and the possibility exists.

I am a student of history. I have read and researched too many times in the past where lack of understanding lead to lack of compassion, which led to abuse, suffering and death. And once we finally ended these abuses, the first question that was asked was, “Why didn’t someone do something earlier.” Genocide, slavery, the Holocaust. Yes, these are “people” issues. And we place a premium on human life because we have learned (slowly and incrementally) compassion and understanding and caring about others. This was not always so. We are an intelligent and sentient species capable of resolving what is right and wrong in regards to ourselves. When I read here and elsewhere the lack of willingness to even consider the suffering of cetaceans, because they are “not us”, I see the same cycle, just in a different manner. All this, for a product that is not needed and that the vast majority of consumers don’t want. This is how this issue affects me personally. “Aggression unchallenged is aggression unleashed.” Well, cruelty that is tolerated diminishes you, it diminishes me, it diminishes everyone on this planet.

Sorry for the length. The sad thing is, I could have gone on a lot longer.

Mick

Michael Raymer,

“I had to jump down here due to the lack of a reply bar.”

No problem. Thank you for your reply.

“That is not my logic at all.”

I see. I’m sorry for the mis-understanding.

“I am against it because I genuinely believe that there are too many un-answered questions about the intelligence, depth of feeling and capacity for suffering of cetaceans. Their intelligence does not have to be “our kind” of intelligence. It just has to be intelligence. Depth of feeling, of suffering, despair, remorse. We simply don’t know how deep it goes.”

I see and understand your feelings. However, I believe you could apply that same reasoning to many different species of animals. I have dealt with many different animals under different circumstances over the years. I have read different reports about cetaceans intelligence. In my personal opinion I have seen nothing to indicate that whales exhibit more intelligence than some other animals. I believe your views are reasonable. However, I believe it is unreasonable to ask people to stop eating whales for the reasons you have given.

“And then there is the suffering. Please do not tell me that the whalers methods are humane. I’ve seen too many videos of whales being harpooned with the current methods.”

I believe the current method of hunting whales is as humane as possible, under the circumstances. Granted, there is some cruelty involved. However, it is due to the circumstances involved and not due to the whalers being deliberately cruel. In other words, there is always a certain amount of cruelty involved in the hunting of wild animals.

“All this, for a product that is not needed and that the vast majority of consumers don’t want. This is how this issue affects me personally.”

What is “needed” and what is not “needed” is totally subjective and cannot be resolved. That’s just one of those things were people will inevitably disagree. I believe the only moral thing to be done is to leave that decision in the hands of those involved. I can say, from personal experience, that there IS a fairly large demand for whale meat in Japan. Many people do eat whale meat. It is certainly not sitting on store shelves collecting dust, I can assure you.

Thank you again. I’ve enjoyed our disscussion very much. Even though I disagree with you, I understand and respect your views and opinions on this matter. Have a good day.

Imforthewhales

I believe the current method of hunting whales is as humane as possible, under the circumstances. Granted, there is some cruelty involved.

If anyone did to a farmyard animal what they do to a whale, they would end up in jail, charged with animal cruelty. No question.

This is all the more horrific when you are comparing the level on cruelty to the end result. Lets stop and think for aminute about this whole sorry saga. whales are not feeding the world. Whaling is not a noble enterprise. Industrial whaling in areas japan ahas not been able to reach until last century has nothing to do with culture.

The end result for all this cruelty is just money,as usual, but more than that it is simply servicing high priced Japanese restarunt patrons who pay high prices for an exotic food which at the end of the day gets flushed down a japanese loo somewhere in Toyko after the whale has been excrected. Surely our worlds supply of precious whales deserve a better fate than this, as do future gernations of people. Surely our whales should not be ending up as japanese poo.

This type of cruelty should be abolished in todays world just as we have moved forward in other areas.

ddpalmer

“If anyone did to a farmyard animal what they do to a whale, they would end up in jail, charged with animal cruelty. No question.”

And if anyone did what they do a farmyard animal what they do to wild deer, they would end up in jail, charged with animal cruelty. No question.

The rules/laws are different for animals under different circumstances. So comparing the two is rather pointless.

Michael Raymer

You just love pulling this crap, don’t you dd. Tell me, what do they do to wild deer? Who are “they”, and what do “they” do?. And if “they” are doing it, why aren’t “they” in jail, charged with animal cruelty? No question? That’s several questions.

What rules/laws are you referring too? What different circumstances? Rules/laws are written down and available to everyone, and you seem to be an authority on this, so you should have no trouble providing this information for our edification.
ddpalmer

They are hunters. They shoot deer with arrows then track them, sometimes for miles, while they deer slowly bleeds to death. They are not in jail because it is an accepted way to hunt deer. Just like explosive harpoons are the accepted way to hunt whales. But if a rancher did that to his cows he would be charged with animal cruelty.

Well the hunting laws for Ohio, as an example, say arrows are acceptable for deer hunting. And the IWC says explosive harpoons are acceptable for whale hunting. While state and federal laws cover the acceptable methods of killing farm animals.

You can look them up yourself. You really need to learn to be more self reliant.
Imforthewhales

DD Palmer…unfortunately hunting occurs throughout the world. some of this hunting is to feed people, subsistence hunting and so forth. other shooters are professionals which shoot feral animals.

Then there are the sport hunters who enjoy stalking an animal and killing it.

I don’t know a lot about sports hunting as it doesn’t turn me on at all.

However, i would take an educated guess that most hunters would be using guns ( with sights) and only a small proportion of hunters would be using the old bow and arrow. why they use a bow and arrow I don’t know…perhaps you can fill me in here as you seem to be an expert on bow and arrow hunting….. but perhaps the sports hunters find it more thrilling? Perhaps it takes them back further towards their Neanderthal roots. Who knows.

The deer hunters would be more likely to end up in jail if they used explosive tipped arrows which blow the insides of the deer apart without killing it outright.

So rather than a bleeding flesh would, the animal would also have damaged liver, kidneys, intestine and lungs.

Now imagine if these deer hunters, having shot the poor animal and hearing the boom as its insides disintegrate, had the animal on the end of a long rope, tied to the bumper bar of their truck.

Whilst the deer bleeds, the hunters pull o the rope dragging it ever close to the truck. This process taking a good ten minutes to a half hour with the animal clearly in agony and struggling for its very life. The look of fear is evident in its eyes as it struggles to get away, not knowing or understanding where this pain has come from or who these strange creatures are.

After the half hour is up the hunters then try taking a few more shots at the deer with a high powered rifle, balancing on the edge of the truck side as they do so. They fire 5 or 6 shots into the deer but even this does not kill it. Meanwhile no-one on board the truck seems to thing that there is anything wrong with this or tries to save the deer.

Someone has the bright idea of getting a bucket of water out and they stick the head of the deer in the bucket of water, attempting to drown in.

Of course there is blood everywhere and there is now a gaping hole the size of a football where the arrow has entered the body of the deer. The deer is weakening.

45 minutes on, and Bob the bow hunter gets out his jumper leads. He goes to the front of the truck, attaches the jumper leads to the truck battery and then places the other ends on the head of the deer.

He then proceeds to electrocute the deer.

Now unbeknown to him, his neighbor Beryl has seen all of this kerfuffle, filmed it on her i-phone and sent the video in to u-tube where it seen by the local police. Bob is arrested, charged and a high profile court case ensues with mass media coverage. the local Ku Klux clan see this on tv and decide to pay bob a visit. His house gets burned down that night in protest and Bob gets sent to jail for 20 years.

Mick

imforthewhales,

“If anyone did to a farmyard animal what they do to a whale, they would end up in jail, charged with animal cruelty.”

“..it is simply servicing high priced Japanese restarunt patrons who pay high prices for an exotic food..”

Hunting wild animals and the slaughter of domesticated animals are two completely different activities with completely different circumstances. I believe the current method of hunting whales is as humane as possible under the circumstances. Any cruelty involved is unavoidable, under the circumstances, and not deliberate.

This statement is grossly incorrect. While I’m sure you can find whale meat in high priced resturants, it can be found in the average local grocery store, as well. The local drugstore has canned whale meat. It sells for about $2.50 a can. And they have no problem selling it. It is hardly a delicacy reserved for rich people.

Imforthewhales

This statement is grossly incorrect. While I’m sure you can find whale meat in high priced resturants, it can be found in the average local grocery store, as well. The local drugstore has canned whale meat. It sells for about $2.50 a can. And they have no problem selling it. It is hardly a delicacy reserved for rich people.

Mick…given that the whaling is supposed to be all about research, ( Japanese claims) do you think that the Japanese would have a problem if the other loophole was removed from the IWC research guidelines?

in other words, if the whales that were bing ‘ researched” were not allowed to be made use of,
would Japanese research whaling continue?

Because to the casual observer, this research whaling appears to be supporting an entire whale meat industry.

Also do you know which particular whale species end up in supermarkets and in cans? Is it the local product ( dolphins, pilot whales etc) or the whales caught in the southern ocean?

As far as unavoidable cruelty goes…whilst the cruelty may not be intentional, it does not remove the fact that it is the most cruel of all forms of hunting, bar trapping of wild animals imo.

The fact is that by its very nature, there is no avoiding this massive cruelty unless lethal whaling stops altogether.
Mick

imforthewhales,

“Mick…given that the whaling is supposed to be all about research, ( Japanese claims) do you think that the Japanese would have a problem if the other loophole was removed from the IWC research guidelines?”

“Also do you know which particular whale species end up in supermarkets and in cans? Is it the local product ( dolphins, pilot whales etc) or the whales caught in the southern ocean?”

“..that it is the most cruel of all forms of hunting…”

Hmmm, would the ICR continue their research program if the whale meat could not be sold? I don’t know. Maybe, maybe not. Please bear in mind, research costs money. Lots of money. The sales of the whale meat defrays some of that cost.

It depends upon the area. The whale meat we have bought here has been Minke whale taken in the SO.

I disagree that whaling is “the most cruel” form of hunting.

Robert Beller

I would just like to weight in on the hunting issue you introduce a little further down with ddpalmer. Currently in most of Maryland (US) you can kill 36 deer each season 12 by shotgun, 12 by bow and 12 with a black powder rifle. Thousands of animals are wounded by inexperience or incompetent hunters every year in Maryland alone. In some counties there is no bag limit for antlerless deer. 100663 white-tailed and sika deer were taken in the 2009-2010 season If only 10% were wounded and escaped that would be 10,000 deer. You’re not shooting paper targets the 10% number is being generous there are lots of hunting stories that end “I chased the blood trail but I never found it”. Hunters aren’t perfect and sometimes animals move unexpectedly. All it takes is one good gust of wind or an unexpected movement to turn an easy kill into a maimed escapee.

Keep in mind this is only hunting one type of animal in one small state on a big planet. I don’t think it is unreasonable to say world wide a million or more animals are legally injured by hunter every year.

http://www.dnr.state.md.us/huntersguide/regionb.asp

Michael Raymer

Where, exactly do you get these estimates? “Thousands of animals”, “if only 10% were wounded”. What is the basis for these numbers? I haven’t seen your name before, but I’m still somewhat new myself. I’ll just say that making stuff up doesn’t work with me. You already got off to a bad start with your “Look how Watson gets flustered,” post. Now you’re talking about 10,000 wounded deer wandering around Maryland every year. No state DNR is going to tolerate that, and the anti-hunters would go into conniptions. And one thing to keep in mind if you’re going to bring up apocryphal stories of blood trails. If it’s a trail and it’s blood, it’s blood that is no longer in the animal. How far are they going to go? I suggest that in the future, you take a little more time deciding what you want to say.

Oh, and BTW, this is a thread about whaling.

Imforthewhales

Mick..it has been claimed that there are stockpiles of Japanese whale meat and some of this is turned into pet food. Do you know if this is true or not?

ddpalmer

Wait 4 minutes ago you claimed that whaling is “…simply servicing high priced Japanese restarunt patrons who pay high prices for an exotic food…”. Now you are talking about it maybe being used as pet food. Did I miss something somewhere. It is a high priced delicacy but it also may be pet food?

Imforthewhales

simple question i thought…is this true or not?
ddpalmer

Yes it was a simple question. But you contend in one post that whale is a high price delicacy then 4 minutes later you ask if it is worth so little that they use it for pet food.

Mick

imforthewhales,

Yes, they keep a stockpile of whale meat, along with stockpiles of other meats, as well. They continually cycle whale meat in and out of storage in order to sell it year ’round and to keep a steady supply on hand.
I have heard that some whale meat from whales caught near the coast is used for pet food. However, I can’t confirm that. It is also unclear if they are talking about actual whales or dolphin species such as Pilot whales.

Imforthewhales

thanks for your reply mick.
Mick

You’re welcome.

Michael Raymer

“They are hunters. They shoot deer with arrows then track them, sometimes for miles, while they deer slowly bleeds to death. They are not in jail because it is an accepted way to hunt deer. Just like explosive harpoons are the accepted way to hunt whales. But if a rancher did that to his cows he would be charged with animal cruelty.

Well the hunting laws for Ohio, as an example, say arrows are acceptable for deer hunting. And the IWC says explosive harpoons are acceptable for whale hunting. While state and federal laws cover the acceptable methods of killing farm animals.

You can look them up yourself. You really need to learn to be more self reliant.”

You paint a very singular picture to suit your own ends. And you’re doing it in the right place. You allege that “They shoot deer with arrows then track them, sometimes for miles, while they deer slowly bleeds to death,” is commonplace in bow-hunting. Nothing is further from the truth. This is me being self-reliant. I know about bow-hunting, much more than you, it would seem. Bow-hunters spend the time, money and effort to make a clean kill (otherwise, they wouldn’t be bow-hunters), and this happens the vast majority of the time. I do admit, off-target shots do occur. But to act like they are the norm shows no knowledge of whatever point you are trying to make.

“They are not in jail because it is an accepted way to hunt deer.” No it’s not. No it is not! You show me a bow-hunter that can’t make his shots, I’ll show you a guy that’s going to have is bow taken away from him by his own peers. A clean kill, with an absolute minimum of suffering is the goal of every hunter. And what kind of common sense is required to know that no hunter wants to track a wounded animal “for miles”?

Honestly, the more I read from you, the more you convince me that you are not here to uphold your beliefs. I think you found a place where you can start trouble, piss people off and inflame tensions. Kudos though, you are very good at it.

Mick

Michael Raymer,

“You paint a very singular picture to suit your own ends.”

“Bow-hunters spend the time, money and effort to make a clean kill (otherwise, they wouldn’t be bow-hunters), and this happens the vast majority of the time. I do admit, off-target shots do occur.”

I understand what you are saying and I generally agree. However, ddpalmer has made good point, as well. You say, “off-target shots do occur”. When this happens, a cruel and inhumane death is a likely result. Any cruelty inflicted is not deliberate or intended. I have heard many people talking about the average time it takes a whale to die. You said that,”I know about bow-hunting”. I would like to ask you a question. What is the average time, in minutes, it takes for a deer to die after being shot?

Imforthewhales

“When deer hunting, your trophy deer shot placement must be put into a vital region of a deer to ensure a quick and humane kill. Once this is done, most deer will not live over 10 seconds”

“Gun Hunting
For rifle hunter’s, I feel a better shot placement then the heart is the middle area of the front shoulder just an inch high of center. One shot; one kill. You can be off a several inches in any direction and you still have a dead trophy deer laying on the ground within seconds”.

“The only exception to this shot placement is if your archery hunting; then a razor sharp broad head on a finely tuned arrow, released into the center of the lungs, may be your best shot placement on a trophy whitetail deer. Your target here is the size of a soccer ball or basketball. A relaxed confident shot under 30 yards and you should be fine unless you suffer form buck fever or bad luck. As you cans see from the photo, a shot 2 to 3 inches off in any direction and you will have a dead deer with somewhat easy tracking. Ideally, I would of liked this shot to be about 1 – 1 1/2 inches lower. Then I could of been off about 4 inches in any direction with the same results. This deer traveled about 35 yards as fast as it could run and the piled up dead within sight.”

I imagine that deer hunting is a lot easier and far more successful than trying to place a harpoon into a moving whale that is 90 per cent underwater and aiming from a rolling moving ship at sea?

When To Shoot
Many whitetail deer hunters ask me; “When is the best time to take the shot at a deer?” I tell them: “The very first opportunity for a quick, clean kill.” As a deer hunter, you have be prepared when the opportunity presents itself. You may not get a second chance for a shot. Whitetail deer are unpredictable; they can and will change direction of movement for no reason. It happens! At times a deer will present a shot without much room for error. Lets say a deer is approaching a shooting lane and if so will present about a 18 to 20 yard shot. It just happens to stop before the lane in a area, about 25 yards away, that has an opening of a couple square feet or so. For me, that’s perfect – I take the shot. Because I have only a small opening, it probably means there is brush, branches, or trees, that may obstruct the deer’s vision in my direction; perfect opportunity to lift and aim my weapon. Also, I practice this scenario in my mind and shoot at a much smaller target when I practice with my bow or rifle. With enough practice, any deer hunter should be comfortable with a shot like this. If not, don’t shoot; wait for the deer to get into the shooting lane – but, be at full draw or have your rifle up as you take aim at the spot on the deer you will be shooting at when it does get into the lane.

http://www.the-deer-hunting-guide.com/trophy_deer_shot_placement.htm
Imforthewhales

Difficulty: EasyInstructionsThings You’ll Need:
Bow and arrow
Rifle
Step 1Notice your target and what lies beyond it. To ensure the utmost safety while hunting, recognize when you spot a deer and then look beyond the deer. Make sure there is nothing beyond the direction you plan to shoot. This protects other hunters and animals in the area.

Step 2Identify inhumane or difficult shots. Certain shots are more effective and humane than others. Frontal shots, when the deer faces you, are too risky for both the bow and the rifle. Your goal is the most humane and ethical shot for a fast kill. Straight down shots, when you are overlooking the deer are also risky. Never take a rear shot, when the deer’s hind end faces you. This severely wounds the animal and is very cruel.

Step 3Try for a shot when the deer quarters toward or away from you. This gives you an excellent shot. The deer is more angled so that you get a clean kill. The perfect shot, however is the broadside shot, when you have a completely unobstructed shot at the broadside of the deer’s body.

Step 4Take your shot. Once you are sure you have the best shot possible for a quick and ethical kill, use your rifle or bow to kill the deer.

Step 5Find the animal. You have successfully hit your target. Observe carefully as the animal moves away. A mortally wounded deer does not usually travel more than 250 yards before it drops.
Michael Raymer

Mick,

imforthewhales got there first. The answer below (at least that’s where it is as I type this) is as good, if not better than any I would have given. The average time it takes for a deer to die after a well placed shot with any suitable, legal equipment is probably around 10 seconds or less. I know of no “official” estimate, and I’m not going to go look for them. I, personally like rifles too much, and don’t have the desire to spend the money to buy, or take the time to practice with archery equipment. But bow-hunters do have that desire and they fulfill their obligations in this regard. I have been around bow-hunters all my life, I have relatives and many, many friends who hunt this way.

I had to say “off-target shots do occur”, because….they do. Bad luck occurs in every facet of existance. And, you and I have corresponded enough now that you know I take responsibility for what I post and I try to be honest in what I say. I will always make a genuine attempt at full disclosure.

My original response was for ddpalmer. While I respect the opinions of those who disagree with me, I don’t respect those who spend their time stirring up trouble. I read post after post from him and it’s not like I haven’t seen this sort of thing before. He flails about, making claims without foundation, accusations against others across the entire spectrum and comparisons that have no basis in logic. That’s not a debate. It’s trolling. And I can’t stop him from doing it. But I can make him have to work harder at it. I can call him on every bogus, pointless claim that he makes. And I don’t mind. This is easy for me.
Mick

imforthewhales and Michael Raymer,

Thank you for your posts.

“Your goal is the most humane and ethical shot for a fast kill.”

“The average time it takes for a deer to die after a well placed shot with any suitable, legal equipment is probably around 10 seconds or less.”

I can accept that the average time for a deer to die is around 10 seconds, under good circumstances.
That seems reasonable and I will not dispute that. however, I also believe that under bad circumstances it can take much longer. I will also agree that a humane and ethical shot is indeed the goal of the vast majority of hunters.
Which brings us back to my original statement. I believe that, just like deer hunting, whale hunting is humane as possible under the circumstances. And, just like other hunters, the whalers goal is a humane shot. I also believe that, just like deer hunting, sometimes inhumane shots are made resulting in a cruel death for the animal being hunted. Therefore, on the question of cruelty, I do not believe that whale hunting is substantially more cruel than other forms of hunting.

Imforthewhales

Yes he is good at it, very good in fact, but i would like to know how much Glen Inwood and or the japanese whaling companies are paying DDP to get on every forum known to man, and every newspaper with a comments section spouting the same inverted crappola?

If Glen Inwood and his little band of merrymakers are not paying you DDPalmer then they should be!

Actually Sea Sheperd should be paying you and the cucumber as well.

Though the cucumber would be earning double your wage from Sea Sheperd.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

I have reviewed that picture of Erik and the dolphin, and it does appear that he is not giving a happy smile, so, I give him the benefit of the doubt that he is happy about captive dolphins.

As to other things, I am not as optimistic as he is, but I am also one to try to give a good fight where I see the need

As for the worry you expressed, why not try and see if I have the integrity? All I will promise is that if you send insults at me on PM I will let them know you did. I leave the ball in your court cucumber.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

Basically, Erik appears actually unhappy that the dolphin is stuck there. IF that needed clarification.

Imforthewhales

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOS20plm7UM&feature=related

Just thought i would post this video of a whale underwater.
Imforthewhales

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f2BstBvaGE

Then try this one.
Smokin’

To get this back on to whaling, I just don’t think that the whole Pete Bethune stunt was worth it. Everyone on the Sea Shepherd forum are all wringing their hands like they are going to arrest the Captain of the Shonan Maru 2, but in the end, and as much as I hate to admit it, nothing will happen to him. They’ll use the same videos as evidence that we had hoped to use as a defense, but they do show provocative action on the part of Captain Pete. I would also agree that whaling itself isn’t part of this trial now, and it won’t be in the future. I just don’t think it was a smart move overall. In the end, I feel he’s going to be convicted and that will be that – just another activist in jail – not even news worthy in a couple of months.

Also…..

Shark finning in Ecuador, Guatemala, and Costa Rica are secretly run by the Shark Fin Mafia.

Whaling is secretly run by the Japanese Yakuza (Mafia).

Tuna fishing in the Mediterranean is secretly run by the Italian Corsican Mafia.

Do you really think that statements like this are helping the cause?
Imforthewhales

Looks like the pro japanese whale killing side have been called into a meeting>?

Maybe Grand Poohbah Glen Inwood is in town.
Imforthewhales

DOHA, Qatar — The Japanese seemed to be everywhere at the U.N. wildlife trade meeting.

Dozens of government officials worked the floor the past two weeks ahead of key votes, offering guidance to confused but supportive delegates. They held a reception for select representatives at their embassy in Qatar, offering up Atlantic bluefin tuna sushi — a typical food served at Japanese formal occasions — the night before the vote on the export ban of the overfished species.

Their aggressive and relentless lobbying campaign appeared to pay dividends.

Japan came out the big winner at the 175-nation Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, or CITES, which wraps up Thursday, successfully defeating the proposed bluefin ban, voting down efforts to regulate the coral trade and joining other Asian nations to prevent several shark species used in the fin trade from gaining protection.

For some activists, the Japanese tactics were proof that CITES has been transformed from a clubby, conservation body to one driven by big money, trade and economics. The meeting is becoming more like U.N. climate change meetings, they said, where politics at times trumps science and a deals are struck by world leaders behind closed doors.

“Japan clearly mobilized massive efforts to keep fisheries out of CITES,” said Mark W. Roberts, senior counsel and policy adviser for the watchdog group Environmental Investigation Agency.

It’s not that the Japanese were the only ones to stake out a position, but they were more organized and persistent, delegates said, than the divided European Union and the United States, which didn’t announce its position on the tuna ban until late in the game.

Japan launched its global campaign months ago, repeatedly meeting with governments big and small. And when it came to the conference in Qatar, they sent a 30-strong delegation that was stacked with fisheries people who have years of experience working the hallways at CITES.

The Japanese insist they were just one of many delegations searching for votes. But they were also under intense pressure at home to defeat the proposed ban on Atlantic bluefin tuna, given it could devastate the country’s fisheries industry since it imports 80 percent of the fish.

Hisashi Endo, the director of the Ecosystem and Conservation Office in the Fisheries Agency of Japan, said delegates stuck to the facts. They argued that regional fisheries bodies were better suited to regulate marine species and that the CITES ban was unfair. They also argued that the ban proposed by Monaco would penalize the Japanese sushi industry, while allowing American and European fisheries to keep catching Atlantic bluefin.

“We are not pressuring anyone,” Endo said. “We are talking to many countries and expressing our opinion and seeking their understanding.”

But some delegates accused Japan of using tactics that went beyond diplomacy and violated the spirit of CITES.

Kenya, which fought the Japanese over tuna and a proposed sale of Zambian and Tanzanian ivory stocks, accused Tokyo of pressuring delegates to support its positions and paying fisheries officials from unnamed African countries to attend the conference — something the Japanese repeatedly denied.

“The way we have seen this conference operate, there is a lot of influence that is quite unnecessary,” said Patrick Omondi, a member of Kenya’s delegation. “That is not very good for species that are affected by trade.”

Javier Rosero, a member of the Ecuadorean delegation that supported most of the marine listings, acknowledged the Japanese played hardball, but argued the United States and others could learn a thing or two from them.

He said the Americans were often too slow to react and were not forceful enough when they did. And in meetings with Ecuadorean officials, Rosero said the Americans didn’t bring anything to offer to the table.

“I have been talking to Japan and they say, ‘What do you need? What kind of project are you able to do?’” Rosero said. “The Japanese come to make business and the States come to explain.”

Others, however, dismissed talk of Japan’s influence as overstated. The Egyptians said it was nonsense, as did the Zambians. Even the Libyans, who supported Japan on the coral and tuna proposals, denied there was any quid pro quo.

“We were with Japan on tuna but not the sharks,” said Hussin Ali Zarough, who was among the most vocal opponents of the tuna ban and called for the crucial vote. “That shows Libyan independence.”

Masanori Miyahara, chief counselor of the Fisheries Agency of Japan, acknowledged the government has funds that were aimed at helping developing countries build their fishing capacity. He said the funds were used by nations to attend CITES and other fisheries conferences — though he did not say how much or which countries benefited from the funds.

“Participation is very important for them to learn what is going on internationally,” Miyahara said. “They use the money for tuna regional fisheries management meeting and other meetings. CITES is one of them.”

But he denied his government “was buying votes” with such funding or its offers of bluefin tuna at its reception.

“We wanted to show what it is,” Miyahara said of the tuna sushi served at the reception. “You can’t buy the vote by just serving bluefin tuna. That’s a silly idea.”

Roberts said Japan’s tactics are reminiscent of the way it operates at the International Whaling Commission, where heavy lobbying and allegations of vote-buying are common. He said activists brought non-whaling governments into the body to win a moratorium on commercial whaling and Japan followed suit, leading to political gridlock with little room for scientific debate.

“That is what happened here,” he said. “The science on the bluefin tuna — if there was no economic factor — would have been a slam dunk. But given that there is millions, if not billions of dollars at stake, it became a political decision.”

http://www.onenewspage.com/news/Front+Page/20100325/9475762/Japan-big-winner-at-UN-conservation-meeting.htm
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

Seems someone has focused on our arguments and has decided to spoof the whaling arguments, I found this http://sagebrush57.blogspot.com/ on Blogspot, as well as this so far. http://txexpatt.blogspot.com/

Based on the style, as well as some of the things said, it also appears that some of us, myself included have some sort of fan. I personally cannot say that I am completely flattered, but I still wonder if it is a dubious honor or not. I linked these so that all could see, and also the ones whose handles are listed to be fair, as this is not my style, in fact my one blog is really not that busy. Mostly about my not being decided as to what to post first.

But also, due to the respectful discussions I and “Mick” have had in the past, I thought you may want to see this.

Hellfire Jack

Haha those are awesome. These people must really be striking a nerve with the person who appears to have spent days copying the forums at http://www.endecoterrorism.com and then commenting on them outside of the forum.

For an “exposer” though it’s pretty weak. Anyone can just join the forums there and read what this obsessed person is “exposing”. Only one person has ever even actually been banned there and it was because she was a mental case who shared her username and password out.

Who ever it was that made these blogs… Thanks for the free advertising! I appreciate it.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

Well, I have not seen much else, so maybe they have stopped.
Deacon Jones

Probably best for them really.

No one knows the user names except apparently this nutter who obsessively follows them around the internet.

All it will do is make people seek out http://www.endecoterrorism.com to read the real posts and then they’ll just laugh at the spiteful idiot(s) who made the blogs when they do.

You have to be a total off the wall imbecile to want to copy and paste months and months worth of posts from some random people on the internet and change and comment on each one.

We’re all having a major laugh at the craziness back on http://www.endecoterrorism.com.
Rammingspeed

I don’t see where it mentions the site, just the players, so I think you have prematurely “hooted” on yourself.
Hellfire Jack

Hey Lenny.. Can you get mine edited so it’s maybe funny or something? It’s really dry. You want a blog to be at least interesting. You know what I mean? Catch the eye. Make them want to read it.

Mine reads like stereo instructions. Here I was, hoping for a good laugh, and I almost fell asleep.

TLDR for the poser on that one. If they’re going to spend hours trying to impersonate someone else at least they can be a bit funny. Now they’re just boring.

bbbieker

“To get this back on to whaling, I just don’t think that the whole Pete Bethune stunt was worth it. Everyone on the Sea Shepherd forum are all wringing their hands like they are going to arrest the Captain of the Shonan Maru 2, but in the end, and as much as I hate to admit it, nothing will happen to him. They’ll use the same videos as evidence that we had hoped to use as a defense, but they do show provocative action on the part of Captain Pete. I would also agree that whaling itself isn’t part of this trial now, and it won’t be in the future. I just don’t think it was a smart move overall. In the end, I feel he’s going to be convicted and that will be that – just another activist in jail – not even news worthy in a couple of months.”

Yeah, I’m with that. The real truth is that no one gives a crud about the whales – there are too many other problems in the world right now. Yeah, they’re cute…. They make a nice cute sound when they get run over by whale-watching boats, or when the new Navy sonar is microwaving their brains in the Pacific during testing. Oops!

We in the US don’t have the time for a bunch of vegan asshole trying to tell the world that they know best. What you got in the US is a couple of “celebrity” has-beans that need publicity and have given you a little attention. Page 46 news now, just like good ol’ Capt Pete Buffoon. Believe me, two years into his prison sentence, his wife will be bouncing on the pool boy while Pete learns to love whale and dolphin meat! Forget about your little letter-writing campaign, no one in the US government is EVER going to take ANYTHING that the Sea Shepherds say seriously. You guys ever figure out why you can’t get flagged in the US or Australia? Because they both know you idiots are full of crap.

Rudd’s doing the right thing now – you Australians should just sit down, shut up, and listen to the leaders that YOU elected!

Oh yeah, sorry to hear that the Seal hunt in Canada is still on! Too bad you can’t do squat about it – I guess you’re all bark and no bite up there now. Time to get the Louisville Slugger out of storage and go hunting some boot liners and some nice, white car seat covers!
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

Hellfire Jack, March 31, 2010 at 5:36 pm

Hey Lenny.. Can you get mine edited so it’s maybe funny or something? It’s really dry. You want a blog to be at least interesting. You know what I mean? Catch the eye. Make them want to read it.

Mine reads like stereo instructions. Here I was, hoping for a good laugh, and I almost fell asleep.

TLDR for the poser on that one. If they’re going to spend hours trying to impersonate someone else at least they can be a bit funny. Now they’re just boring.

If I could, but I am not the one that made it, so , I have no power over what is posted there. As I said, I found them, and I reported their existence. I was serious when I said that I do not do that kind of thing.

Rammingspeed

You shouldn’t be so jealous they made me famous first, and do the rest of us a favor, try not to sound so whiny.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1306324129 Leonard Greene

Me or Jack?
Rammingspeed

Jack is acting like a whiny gril. He is jsut jealous that he doesnt have his own blog.
Hellfire Jack

Haha looks like we found our poseur. The real Rammingspeed doesn’t post here. That guy’s a fake.

Michael Raymer

WTF does any of this have to do with the issue of whaling and the article at the top of the page? Why don’t you children take your little pissing contest out to the playground where it belongs. Jeez, this is what happens when you let kids play without proper supervision.

« PREVIOUS POST

Castrate Knut The Global Warming Polar Bear?

The Green Quote: Cro-Mag Singer John Joseph Explains New Vegan Book Title

Ecorazzi

Sea Shepherd Building A Robot Army?

About Michael dEstries

Latest Stories

Most Viewed Stories

Twitter Updates

Recent Comments

Categories

Connect

Ecorazzi

Sea Shepherd Building A Robot Army?

About Michael dEstries

Latest Stories

Most Viewed Stories

Twitter Updates

Recent Comments

Categories

Connect

Subscribe