Whale Wars: Boat Sliced in Two in Antarctic Clash

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Frazzled**

dogma wrote:
Frazzled wrote:You're right, not murder. Attempted murder. Much better.

No provable intent to kill, no murder.

I could prove intent. Voluntary manslaughter at worst. Guess what-the opther side can blow you away if you are attempting voluntary manslughter. Although this is not the instance based on the video, the ship would well be in its rights to tear those boats apart and seize the mother ship. Preferably with katanas, tonfas, and sushi firing cannon.

**Tyyr**

ShumaGorath wrote:
The bulk of the breeds harvested consist of Byrde's whales and minke whales, 396 and 10,443 respectively over the course of 20 years. Byrde's whales are not even of concern in terms of population and but minke's do rate at least a minor concern though their total population is estimated to be around 770,000 animals world wide currently.

Now how many are they harvesting unreported while operating under the guise of research? As is the crux of the issue. Japan is not the only nation in the world performing this research, why exactly do you think they are the only ones under such scrutiny?

That's the number they are harvesting for research. That's the only whaling they are known to do. In fact they usually don't even fill their allowable quota from the IWC. They have no need to try and hide extras when they're leaving ~300 whales a year off their tag. Why generate even more bad publicity by harvesting outside their quota when they could simply take another 300 without violating the IWC permit? Additionally, the figure of approximately 3,000 tons of whale being consumed annually meshes quite well with the quantity of whales that they harvest under their research permits. So unless you're suggesting some huge underground whale meat black market that's how many whales they're taking. The Byrde's whales which are not even the least bit endangered and southern minke's who have a population of about 660,000 according to the IWC. Each year they harvest approximately 0.079% of the local minke population. So to be quite frank everyone screaming "The Japanese are going to hunt them to extinction!" is an idiot.

I think the Japanese are under this kind of scrutiny because they're an easier target. I think the Sea Shepherd group probably finds it a lot easier to harass and annoy a group of non-white whalers several thousand miles away from any where as opposed to a large group of white northern European fishers a few dozen or hundred miles from home. Hell, if you want to get pissy about someone whaling talk to the Norwegians who have upped their quotas of northern minke whales to over 1,000 on a population of 107,000 whales. That's about 0.93% of the population. Their impact on the local population is about 12 times greater than the Japanese influence on the southern minke population.

Something interesting that came up in looking for Norway's numbers, in reference to the calls of "It's illegal!" Norway filed an objection to the moratorium on whaling with IWC when it was first emplaced and consequently they are not bound by it at all. That's how much legal weight it carries.

**Frazzled**

well that opens a whole new kettle of er uh fish don't it. We can add Viking longboats to our new reality program. Excelsior!

**Tyyr**

I apologize for injecting reality into a discussion about whaling. That was probably a miss-step on my part.

**Frazzled**

Tyyr wrote:I apologize for injecting reality into a discussion about whaling. That was probably a miss-step on my part.

Exactly. Quit trolling our fine thread.

**RustyKnight**

Maybe the Sea Shepard people should go pick on the Alaskans. I'm fairly certain the natives' canoes can't cut the Steve Irwin in half. Then again, if the natives get inured by the stink bombs, they may start trying to harpoon the conservationists.

**Tyyr**

And that would just be good TV for everyone.

**dogma**

Frazzled wrote:
I could prove intent. Voluntary manslaughter at worst.

Yes, in the event that someone were actually killed, that is the case.

Frazzled wrote:
Guess what-the opther side can blow you away if you are attempting voluntary manslughter.

You can't attempt voluntary manslaughter. You can take a deliberate action, which then leads to the unintended death of an incidental victim. You can't try someone for attempted manslaughter. You might be able to use the presence of an incidentally threatening action as a defense against a murder, or even a manslaughter, charge but that's all a matter of the jury.

**Frazzled**

dogma wrote: You can't try someone for attempted manslaughter. You might be able to use the presence of an incidentally threatening action as a defense against a murder, or even a manslaughter, charge but that's all a matter of the jury.

Er, yes you can. Local states may call it by different things, but you most definitely can.

**dogma**

Frazzled wrote:
Er, yes you can. Local states may call it by different things, but you most definitely can.

Hmm, so you can. Didn't know that. Though it doesn't appear as though it would apply to this example. From my brief reading it seems like it should only apply to cases that are plead down from attempted murder, or instances in which emotion based statements are made in the course of battery (eg. hitting someone while yelling "I'll kill you").

**Oldgrue**

sebster wrote: Animal welfare and social programs are not mutually exclusive.

Agreed, they're not mutually exclusive. I see them as significantly lower priority.

ShumaGorath wrote:Because billion dollar food aid packages have been sooo successful.

Foreign food aid packages have always been a bad idea. Whale conservation efforts (Big famous 32 year old ones!) should simply be lower priority than humans first locally, then overseas.

The effectiveness of how whale conservation uses that "drop in the bucket" is a testament to ingenuity leaving me to wonder how clever they could have been with $5million to the benefit of people.

More importantly the impact of anti-whaling activists is just as likely to be hokum. Monkeywrenching isn't ok because its nonlethal.

**ShumaGorath**

I think the Japanese are under this kind of scrutiny because they're an easier target. I think the Sea Shepherd group probably finds it a lot easier to harass and annoy a group of non-white whalers several thousand miles away from any where as opposed to a large group of white northern European fishers a few dozen or hundred miles from home. Hell, if you want to get pissy about someone whaling talk to the Norwegians who have upped their quotas of northern minke whales to over 1,000 on a population of 107,000 whales. That's about 0.93% of the population. Their impact on the local population is about 12 times greater than the Japanese influence on the southern minke population.

Or it could be the fact that they utilize unnecessary lethal methods when operating in a sanctuary area recognized by the IWC to already be well tracked and slowly recovering. It could also be that since the initiation of "research" in 1988 the number of whales harvested by japan has doubled (current "research" is culling more than twice the number of whales initially required by the same program). It could also have something to do with the fact that only half of the ventures produced anything scientifically useful or verifiable and most didn't require lethal methodology.

A 2006 episode of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's popular science show Catalyst, which strongly argued against whaling, reported that of the 18 year JARPA I program, which lethally obtained samples from 6800 whales, less than 55 peer-reviewed papers were produced, of which only 14 were claimed on the program to be relevant to the goals of the JARPA program, and that only four would require lethal sampling. Some of the research includes a paper named Fertilizability of ovine, bovine, and minke whales spermatazoa intracytoplasmically injected into bovine oocytes.[89] Joji Morishita of JARPA has said the number of samples was required in order to obtain statistically significant data. More detailed list of Scientific papers presented to IWC up to 2005.[2]

So lets see.

Double the numbers harvested currently (despite stocks remaining the same) as compared to the same studies initiated in 1988. - Check

Harvesting in an internationally recognized whale sanctuary. - Check

Utilizing lethal methods where they are not required and failing to produce anything of scientific merit or use. - Check

The IWC has repeatedly issued requests to the japanese government to deny requests for scientific lethal whale harvesting. Despite the questionable use and largely scientifically meaningless increase in the number of such takes the japanese government has continued to refuse. - Check

This certainly does all sound quite legitimate doesn't it?

Agreed, they're not mutually exclusive. I see them as significantly lower priority.

And not everyone agrees with you when one gets far better results with an infinitesimally small fraction of the funds the other receives.

**Mad Monk's Mekshop**

Tyyr wrote:
garret wrote:Sea sheaprd has noble goals. but there going about it all wrong.
The only true way to change something in peacefully.
violence never trully changed anything. Remember ghandi,ceser chavez or mlk.

...wow. That's just wilful ignorance. Violence never changes anything? Remember Khan, Alexander, Caesar, Hitler, Eisenhower? Historically peaceful means have change little compared to what violence has.

r3n3g8b0y wrote:Hmmm let's see..

1.) A Japanese ship killing whales- ILLEGAL

I've been looking into this and from what I can tell it's not. First off there's the obvious thing to point out that the IWC (International Whaling Commission) has issued Japan a permit to harvest a certain quantity of whales each year and the Japanese are harvesting less than that. Now you might want to contest that it's a front for commerical whaling but even the IWC admits that the Japanese turn in their research data and it's actually quite useful. Now even if the IWC revoked the permit there's the issue that the IWC is not a law making body. It's really more of an alliance type organization. Their 1986 moritorium carries no real legal weight unless the signatories choose to enact their own laws in their own countries and then prosecute their own citizens.

2.) Fishing in Australian waters without a permission- ILLEGAL

Austrailia has claimed the Antarctic Ocean?

3.) Ramming a boat, and wrecking it- ILLEGAL

Intentionally, maybe. However from watching the footage the Ady Gil appears to still be under power or at least coasting forward still when she's hit. From the footage shown there's just about no way you'd ever get a conviction on the Japanese crew for ramming. Frankly it looks more like incompetent seamenship on the part of the Ady Gil's crew. They're... well they're idiots and don't realize that a 500 ton ship can't stop or turn on a dime. They paid for it by getting their nice boat all broke.

4.) Injuring people on the boat- ILLEGAL

One person cracked two ribs as a result of the aforementioned idiocy on their own part.

r3n3g8b0y wrote:whales are nearly extinct, they're protected by law mate!

Some are, but not the species the Japanese currently actively hunt. Even those that are endangered that the Japanese hunted at one point in the last 20 years were harvested in such low numbers as to be rather inconsequential.

r3n3g8b0y wrote:this isn't the point though, the point is that Japan keeps on killing a nearly extinct species and noone seems to give a feth!

See the above, you're just wrong.

sebster wrote:This thread really needed to be called Japanese Run Over Bob Barker.

I heartily endorse this idea.

sebster wrote:The Japanese are signatories to treaties that stop whale harvesting. They continue to whale under the claim that it's for scientific purposes, with the sale of whale meat as a by product - they pretend they're collecting specimen samples.

This is obviously a lie, and while governments continue to attempt resolve this diplomatically, ultimately this could be taken to international court.

Which given that the Japanese not only have a permit for harvesting these whales from the governing body of that treaty, the IWC has admitted the research they collect is top notch and useful, and that the japanese whaling industry requires subsidies to just break even... well I wish you the best of luck in that case. You'll need it in any court that looks at facts and the letter of the law rather than "DAAAWWWW look at da purdy whales!" emotions.

sebster wrote:Meanwhile, its very odd that you'd call the surveillance and acts of nuisance performed by the anti-whalers as piracy, but not complain about the whalers ramming a stationary vessel.

If you look at the video the Ady Gil was either under power when hit or recently under power. See my above reply on this subject. Proving they were rammed and not just incompetent seamen will be one hell of a case to have to make. Additionally, having your props fouled in the storm wracked and iceberg filled Antarctic Ocean thousands of miles from land and any chance of timely rescue is more than a nuisance. It borders on attempted murder.

The following breeds of whale are presently classified as endangered by the IUCN;

Fin Whale

Of which Japan has harvested 13 in the last 20 years.

Sei Whale

Of which Japan has harvested 492 in the last 20 years.

Sperm Whale

Of which Japan has harvested 45 in the last 20 years and is only classified as vulnerable not endangered.

The bulk of the breeds harvested consist of Byrde's whales and minke whales, 396 and 10,443 respectively over the course of 20 years. Byrde's whales are not even of concern in terms of population and but minke's do rate at least a minor concern though their total population is estimated to be around 770,000 animals world wide currently.

..and officially, China cares about it's people and the environment, Hitler was a nice man and Games Workshop has balanced rules.
What the authorities say, and what the Government is REALLY doing are two completely different things...

**Gwar!**

And you know/care what the Japanese do because...

**dogma**

r3n3g8b0y wrote:
..and officially, China cares about it's people and the environment,

It does, just not all of either. Caring about a group is not the same as caring about every member of a group.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gwar! wrote:And you know/care what the Japanese do because...

You don't have care about a thing to be amused by the discussion of that thing.

**Mad Monk's Mekshop**

Gwar! wrote:And you know/care what the Japanese do because...

..Killing a nearly extinct species is just wrong...I mean look at all the species that don't exist anymore, just because some rich nutbag wanted to have a trophy for his lounge room..

**Gwar!**

r3n3g8b0y wrote:
Gwar! wrote:And you know/care what the Japanese do because...

..Killing a nearly extinct species is just wrong...I mean look at all the species that don't exist anymore, just because some rich nutbag wanted to have a trophy for his lounge room..

If nature wanted it to be not-extinct, it would have given it MIRVs for Limbs.

**Mad Monk's Mekshop**

Gwar! wrote:
r3n3g8b0y wrote:
Gwar! wrote:And you know/care what the Japanese do because...

..Killing a nearly extinct species is just wrong...I mean look at all the species that don't exist anymore, just because some rich nutbag wanted to have a trophy for his lounge room..
If nature wanted it to be not-extinct, it would have given it MIRVs for Limbs.

..and the fact that Japanese are hunting and killing the whales has nothing to do with it right?!

**Oldgrue**

And not everyone agrees with you when one gets far better results with an infinitesimally small fraction of the funds the other receives.

I'll table taking issue with prioritizing sea mammals over one's countrymen for the time being.

So sabotaging other vessels with no nation's letter of marque is somehow ethical?

**Kilkrazy**

Neither side is ethical. Both are wrong.

**Oldgrue**

Kilkrazy wrote:Neither side is ethical. Both are wrong.

Because you agree with the pirate?
The man and his crew are pirates (and not in he good FSM manner) and are damn lucky they haven't gotten anyone killed. At some point they'll cross a crew who have more firepower than just sushi knives and harsh language.

**Gwar!**

As I said, if the Japanese do decide "FETH YOU WHALE.... WARS PEOPLE" and just shoot at them, killing a good few, what are the Oz gonna do about it? The Japanese Government may be "weak" atm, but even they wouldn't dream of extraditing someone over this.

**Oldgrue**

I'm amazed these people still have their 501c3. I'd have expected them to be sued out of non-profit status for confessed piracy.

**Kilkrazy**

Oldgrue wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:Neither side is ethical. Both are wrong.

Because you agree with the pirate?
The man and his crew are pirates (and not in he good FSM manner) and are damn lucky they haven't gotten anyone killed. At some point they'll cross a crew who have more firepower than just sushi knives and harsh language.

I don't know who is supposed to be the pirate but I don't agree with either side.

The Japanese whaling programme is a government pork barrel project designed to funnel taxpayer money to a few industrial and local interests in order to garner votes for the LDP and cushy post-retirement jobs for ex-ministers. It's nothing to do with traditional Japanese culture or a reaction against western Imperialism or a need or desire to eat whale meat.

The Sea Shepherd people should not be mucking around causing danger on the high seas for the sake of a few whales.

Just because there are two sides in a disagreement it doesn't mean that one side must be right!

**ShumaGorath**

Oldgrue wrote:I'm amazed these people still have their 501c3. I'd have expected them to be sued out of non-profit status for confessed piracy.

They don't engage in piracy. That term has a meaning. You're not using it right.

**Wrexasaur**

Seriously though folks, these guys are driving around in Batman's freaking boat, with a fething sticker of a jolly roger on their side...

THAT. IS. NOT. PIRACY. Even though it is a damn shame they have such a nice piece of kit.

THIS... is a freaking modern pirate. THIS...

They run around, you know, actually pirating... actually... pirating.

Or, according the the pics limited info, a Priate... which sound like a good name for the Stink-bomb throwing eco-nuts. Like a Prius, the Prius of pirates.

**Mad Monk's Mekshop**

**Wrexasaur**

**Mad Monk's Mekshop**

don't get it..

**Doombot001**

Sea Shepard are doing what a lot of people WISH they could do. Their sticking their middle finger to the man and making sure stuff gets done right.

Hell yeah, I support em. And, as a member of Oceania, I hope Australia and the Kiwi's make sure that no more whales get hunted.

Kudo's to Australia and New Zealand (and Tazmania, you crazy mofo's). Luckily Hawaii has a "zone" around humpbacks. You can't go around 500 or so feet. If they pop up, you have to immediately cut your engines and drift until they pass by.