Inevitable?

[lionking]

Sorry to tell you quadraginta, but the Ady Gil has now sunk.


http://www.theage.com.au/national/ady-gil-sinks-after-collision-20100108-lxlh.html

The New Zealand-registered whaling protest ship Ady Gil, which collided on Wednesday with a Japanese whaling ship, has sunk while being towed, Sea Shepherd conservation society spokesman Paul Watson says.
Captain Watson told ABC Radio the crew of the Bob Barker - the conservation group's newest ship to take to the waters - tried all day on Thursday to salvage the the $1.5 million vessel.
But attempts to tow the badly-damaged vessel failed and the crew was unable to keep it afloat.

 

[shuize]

Bye-bye Ady Gil.

Too bad your captain was an idiot.

 

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

I am not sympathetic to tu quoque arguments about how "They did it first." or "They deserved it." These are childish, and the open ocean is no place to use such logic to justify deadly behavior. If this was the result of a deliberate act by the skipper or pilot of the Shonan Maru then they deserve to lose their master's ticket at the very least. Criminal prosecution would be more in order.

"They deserved it" isn't an argument, it's a statement of opinion on the results of the action. I absolutely think they deserved to have their boat sunk, given what they do. If the Shonan Maru captain deliberately rammed them, I don't condone it, and he should be prosecuted. But I have no problem saying that the Sea Shepherd folks deserved what they got. I don't agree with how it happened, if it indeed was deliberate, but I don't have any sympathy for them.

If the Shonan Maru skipper is subject to prosecution, I can't believe that the personnel of the Sea Shepherd wouldn't be equally prosecutable for their actions. I'm sure they would be lesser charges, but trying to disable another boat, amongst other things, has to be against the law.

I agree with you that it was an awfully cool boat. Too bad it fell into the hands of that band of knuckleheads.

 

[quadraginta]

Sorry to tell you quadraginta, but the Ady Gil has now sunk.


http://www.theage.com.au/national/ady-gil-sinks-after-collision-20100108-lxlh.html

Tragic. Beyond tragic.

It is a shame that there is no law preventing the reckless, wanton endangerment of a thing of beauty.

I don't think that I would be as sad if Earthrace had sunk while trying for the circumnavigation record, or in some other misfortune related to the purpose for her existence, but this was just a waste, regardless of who is at fault.

I do hold Sea Shepherd responsible for putting her in harm's way, aside from technicalities about fault in the collision itself. I will not easily forgive them, if ever.

Very sad. An ignoble death for a noble creation.

 

[quadraginta]

"They deserved it" isn't an argument, it's a statement of opinion on the results of the action. I absolutely think they deserved to have their boat sunk, given what they do. If the Shonan Maru captain deliberately rammed them, I don't condone it, and he should be prosecuted. But I have no problem saying that the Sea Shepherd folks deserved what they got. I don't agree with how it happened, if it indeed was deliberate, but I don't have any sympathy for them.

If the Shonan Maru skipper is subject to prosecution, I can't believe that the personnel of the Sea Shepherd wouldn't be equally prosecutable for their actions. I'm sure they would be lesser charges, but trying to disable another boat, amongst other things, has to be against the law.

I agree with you that it was an awfully cool boat. Too bad it fell into the hands of that band of knuckleheads.

"They deserved it." is a justification. It is an "argument" in defense of the actions. That it is also an opinion does not change that.

It is a wrong-headed opinion as well as an invalid argument. Saying, "I absolutely think they deserved to have their boat sunk, given what they do." is an argument for escalation, and cannot lead to any good places. IMO if it was deliberate then it was also attempted murder, and I am not engaging in hyperbole when I say that.

I think that the actions of the Ady Gil's master were likely regrettable, unfortunate, perhaps unsanctionable, and, as far as putting the Ady Gil itself in harm's way, unforgivable. I do not think that they merited a death sentence, and it is nothing short of a miracle that one was not meted out. I agree with assessments of culpability on the part of Sea Shepherd in general, and the Ady Gil's master in particular, but if that collision was a deliberate act by the Shonan Maru there is no rational logic which supports the idea that "They deserved it."

Not only is it disproportionate reaction to an unconscionable degree, it is more than that. No sailor, certainly no blue water sailor can watch that video without seeing in their own mind's eye the hull of the Shonan Maru looming above them, and thinking about the icy water below. This isn't some kind of action movie, or a video game.

I probably can't express myself well about this. You either get it or you don't. Anyone who has spent much time handling small boats in big water will get it.

 

[arthwollipot]

At least for the time being I'm willing to allow the use of "dead in the water" as a perhaps hyperbolic expression of "not under way". The video from the deck of the Shonan Maru shows what appears to me to be the wake and propwash of a boat holding station until the very last moments before impact, when there was a failed desperate attempt to avoid the collision.

This is why my current working hypothesis is of the "OMG! He's really gonna do it." flavor.

In the interests of further disclosure, I am trying very hard not to have a dog in this fight. I admit to a disapproval of the practice of whale hunting, but my objections are not well thought out and maybe even somewhat wooish, so I can't even articulate them well to myself, much less anyone else.

OTOH, as a sailor and waterman of many years I deplore many of the tactics used by Sea Shepherd. I do not try to justify any of their actions based on some nebulous quality of superior ethics or morality.

It is as a sailor that my concern about this episode is engaged. Regardless of Sea Shepherd's past or potential behavior there is no way to condone the deliberate destruction of a crewed vessel at sea, if this is what occurred. The "David and Goliath" proportions of the vessels involved would make such an action even more egregious. The Ady Gil was not offering a threat of serious deadly harm to the Sonan Maru, and no action offering deadly harm in return can be sanctioned.

I am not sympathetic to tu quoque arguments about how "They did it first." or "They deserved it." These are childish, and the open ocean is no place to use such logic to justify deadly behavior. If this was the result of a deliberate act by the skipper or pilot of the Shonan Maru then they deserve to lose their master's ticket at the very least. Criminal prosecution would be more in order.

Having said all that, if the Ady Gil was put in harm's way by the reckless actions of her master, and it was beyond the ability of the Shonan Maru to avoid contact then the same condemnation applies there.

Right now, from what I have seen so far I am inclined to suspect that the contact was deliberate by the Shonan Maru, that her skipper saw an opportunity with a plausible excuse and took it. But I admit to confirmation bias, and question my own judgment. I have not made up my mind.

Well said, quad.

 

[shuize]

I sail in Japan. Although, I admit, I do not have much open ocean sailing experience, I cannot really understand how Sea Shepherd can take their boats out to provoke a confrontation with large less maneuverable ships through such dangerous acts as attempting to foul propellers in notoriously dangerous seas and then cry "foul" when something like this happens.

As I posted above, based on the video from the Japanese ship, it appears to me that Ady Gil was slowly maneuvering toward the Japanese ship and then, inexplicably, added additional forward propulsion just before the collision. Why?

However, even if the Japanese ship swerved toward the Ady Gil -- which I don't think is at all obvious -- I still have very little sympathy for the activists. First, they were in a far more maneuverable craft. Second, they went looking for trouble.

Even in my limited experience, I know not to f--- around on the water. Much less the Southern Ocean.

 

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

"They deserved it." is a justification. It is an "argument" in defense of the actions. That it is also an opinion does not change that.

It is a wrong-headed opinion as well as an invalid argument. Saying, "I absolutely think they deserved to have their boat sunk, given what they do." is an argument for escalation, and cannot lead to any good places. IMO if it was deliberate then it was also attempted murder, and I am not engaging in hyperbole when I say that.

That is no more an argument for escalation than someone saying "I think Saddam Hussein deserved to be removed as ruler" is an argument for invading Iraq. One can understand that Saddam deserved to not be dictator and also disagree with invading a country. Similarly, one can state that the Sea Shepherds deserve to have a ship taken from them and not support ramming into them with another ship.

I think that the actions of the Ady Gil's master were likely regrettable, unfortunate, perhaps unsanctionable, and, as far as putting the Ady Gil itself in harm's way, unforgivable. I do not think that they merited a death sentence, and it is nothing short of a miracle that one was not meted out. I agree with assessments of culpability on the part of Sea Shepherd in general, and the Ady Gil's master in particular, but if that collision was a deliberate act by the Shonan Maru there is no rational logic which supports the idea that "They deserved it."

Again, you seem to be confusing the result of what happened with how it happened. The actual result was that a ship was sunk. Nobody was murdered. I will say again: I think the Sea Shepherd people deserved the actual result, namely losing a ship. I don't support how it happened for the exact reason you said: it was extremely dangerous, and it was potentially the Shonan Maru taking the law into their own hands (which as wrong as when the Sea Shepherd people do it). Had someone been killed, I wouldn't say "they deserved it," because I don't think any of them deserve to be killed. And I would fully support prosecuting the Shonan Maru captain if it turns out he did this intentionally.

 

[politas]

I sail in Japan. Although, I admit, I do not have much open ocean sailing experience, I cannot really understand how Sea Shepherd can take their boats out to provoke a confrontation with large less maneuverable ships through such dangerous acts as attempting to foul propellers in notoriously dangerous seas and then cry "foul" when something like this happens.

As I posted above, based on the video from the Japanese ship, it appears to me that Ady Gil was slowly maneuvering toward the Japanese ship and then, inexplicably, added additional forward propulsion just before the collision. Why?

Well, it looks to me like the Ady Gil crossed the bows of the Shonen Maru, somehow turned, so they were facing the Shonen Maru's projected path, at which point they held station, possibly intending to throw things at the Shonen Maru as it passed them. At that point, the Shonen Maru turns so that the Ady Gil is now directly in its path, the Ady Gil tries to escape by moving forward, which the Shonen Maru makes impossible by turning back in the other direction to keep them directly ahead. That's what it looks like to me, based on the combination of the two videos posted.

However, even if the Japanese ship swerved toward the Ady Gil -- which I don't think is at all obvious -- I still have very little sympathy for the activists. First, they were in a far more maneuverable craft.

The Shonen Maru shows a lot of manoeuvrability in the video shot from the other boat, and the Ady Gil was sitting still in the water, which makes it not very manoeuvrable.

Second, they went looking for trouble.

They went looking to harass the whalers, not to sink them.

I've heard a lot of talk about drag lines being used by the Sea Shepherd people to foul anchors. Has any whaler boat ever actually been disabled by such a tactic? Is there actual evidence that these drag lines have been used, or is it just claims?

 

[332nd]

Sorry to tell you quadraginta, but the Ady Gil has now sunk.


http://www.theage.com.au/national/ady-gil-sinks-after-collision-20100108-lxlh.html

*&^%!!!!!!!

Looks like testosteroneus-jackassus has claimed another beautiful machine.

 

[lionking]

They went looking to harass the whalers, not to sink them.

I've heard a lot of talk about drag lines being used by the Sea Shepherd people to foul anchors. Has any whaler boat ever actually been disabled by such a tactic? Is there actual evidence that these drag lines have been used, or is it just claims?

From the horses mouth:

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

Paul Watson has said that the organization has sunk ten whaling ships while also destroying millions of dollars worth of equipment. He considers the actions to be against "criminal operations" and has called the group an "anti-poaching organization".[

Yes, it's from Wikipedia, but it's referenced. If it was in error it would have been edited by now.

ETA In the wikipedia article is a photo of one of Sea Sheperd's boats with the names of the whalers they claim to have sunk proudly displayed. Pirates without doubt in my opinion.

 

[politas]

From the horses mouth:

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

Scuttling boats at harbour is hardly the same as sinking them in the middle of the ocean, but if they are ramming boats at sea, then the Shonen Maru's actions is not an escalation, but meeting force with equivalent force, I suppose.

I note that there's no mention in the article of draglines to foul propellers, though.

 

[lionking]

Frankly, I'm embarrassed that Australia gives these people access to our ports.

 

[shuize]

They went looking to harass the whalers, not to sink them.

I've heard a lot of talk about drag lines being used by the Sea Shepherd people to foul anchors. Has any whaler boat ever actually been disabled by such a tactic? Is there actual evidence that these drag lines have been used, or is it just claims?

It's not the anchor. It's the propellers. Loss of propulsion in heavy seas such as are common in the Southern Ocean could mean loss of the ship and all aboard.

From the article reporting the sinking of the Ady Gil:

It was possible Sea Shepherd could try to sue the whaling ship's master for negligence in Wednesday's clash, he said. But the whalers could also try to have the Ady Gil charged with terrorism at sea for trying to foul its propellers with rope - a tactic Sea Shepherd openly says it uses.

http://www.theage.com.au/national/ady-gil-sinks-after-collision-20100108-lxlh.html


ETA: Better yet, here is the same from Sea Shepherd's own site:

Last year, Sea Shepherd tried to foul the propellers of Nisshin Maru, and Greenpeace campaigners tried to hook their inflatables to whales being hauled up the stern ramp.

http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-media/editorial-070115-1.html


So, yeah, intentionally trying to foul propellers of ships in the Southern Ocean. That's more than just protesting or harassment.

Screw Sea Shepherd.

 

[richardm]

"Terrorism at sea"? Is everyone a terrorist these days?

Ady Gil appeared to be speeding up prior to the collision.

It looked to me like an effort to spool the engines up to turn away from the collision, which was inevitable at that point. But who knows, perhaps the helmsman had a sudden suicidal urge.

 

[rjh01]

If they were trying to avoid a collision then they could have gone into reverse. They do have one I assume? I could also see no hint of a turn by Ady Gil.

 

[Shrike]

Can I just be naive here and think that maybe both captains made a mistake?
As in, the captain of the Ady Gil thinking, they'll never hit us, and the captain of the Shonen Maru thinking, they have a fast ship, I'll threaten them a bit and they'll move out of the way?
IOW a mistake on both sides?

 

[Belz...]

My opinion is that they deliberately provoked the Japanese in order to have something to whip people into an uproar about.

It doesn't seem to be working.

Perhaps, but ramming the ship, presumably with the intent of sinking her, is criminal. Both crews should be charged.

ETA: (If the story is correct)

 

[Belz...]

But like I said, in the case of Minkes, it is like the Canadian seal hunt. Minkes are the rats of the sea. Hunting them in small numbers is totally sustainable.

But.... think about those cute white baby seals!!!! NOOOO!!!!!

 

[politas]

It's not the anchor. It's the propellers.

Yeah, I knew that. Just had a complete brain fart and typed the wrong word.

So, yeah, intentionally trying to foul propellers of ships in the Southern Ocean. That's more than just protesting or harassment.

Screw Sea Shepherd.

I certainly agree that the Sea Shepherd folk are going too far. I'm not sure that really justifies running over a small boat like that.

On the other hand both the whalers and the Sea Shepherd folk have other boats in the vicinity. None of them are out there operating solo. No one is being abandoned to die. I still think that fouling the propellers is a lesser offence than ramming a small boat.

Also, the whalers are there on false pretences. They aren't there for scientific research, they're there to catch whales in order to sell whale meat, contrary to the purpose of International treaty.

So screw the whalers, too.