New Sea Shepherd vessel and shes a beauty

[Cadence]

It's sad we get into a pissing contest about the intent of Sea Shepherd as an organization. However Watson's total disregard for Colregs and the wellbeing of those kids "crew" is deplorable.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Cadence

It's sad we get into a pissing contest about the intent of Sea Shepherd as an organization. However Watson's total disregard for Colregs and the wellbeing of those kids "crew" is deplorable.

I don't see it as a 'pissing contest'. I see it that grown people should be able to have a discussion around the pro's and con's of such an organisation without the 'pissing'. I think you would agree

One of the aspects of any discussion I find about the good Admiral Watson ( ) is that the 'against' side often quote misleading and/or misleading information in order to refute any positives of the organisation.

For example, how is 'Watson' breaking the Colreg's? The last two campain's he was not involved in. Not that I would deny the Colreg's are being broken, they most certainly are, but any organisation actively stopping poaching, theft, destruction will have to break the Colregs in some way.

And here's an interesting one, why is it that those apposed to Sea Shephered are so keen to point out the breaking of the 'Law' by Sea Shepherd, but fail to mention when the poachers do. There has been some deliverate ramming of Sea Shepherd vessels in the past three years, all caught on film, but theres limited acknowledgment of when this occurs.

And, re the common responses about those 'kids' who crew. 'kids' really? Where does this myth come from Most of the crews are well beyond the 'kids', and if you ever watch the Whale War's tv series, it was also quite clear that most would be in their 30's and above.

So (not aimed at you Cadence), how about a bit of factual information in the debate, without all the emotional accuasations and get down to the what is really happening.

Personally I thank God for them, because if they were not protecting the ocean's, no one else would be.

[hpeer]

Just to dabble my toes in this caldron...

I really don't care if Watson is legal or illegal. And yeah, he's a nut case. I don't care.

Over the centuries humanity has raped and pillaged Earth. Humanity has written laws to make this rape and pillage legal and respectable.

Now someone, besides Farley Mowat, has the Guts to do what is "right" even if it is not popular or sanctioned by the money fuled bureaucrats.

Power to 'em, long may his big jib wave, etc.

P.S. I love watching humpbacks breach. There is something extra special when you are alone but for the breaching whales, observing their exhuberence as the sole human to do so. It's really something.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by hpeer

Just to dabble my toes in this caldron...

I really don't care if Watson is legal or illegal. And yeah, he's a nut case. I don't care.

Over the centuries humanity has raped and pillaged Earth. Humanity has written laws to make this rape and pillage legal and respectable.

Now someone, besides Farley Mowat, has the Guts to do what is "right" even if it is not popular or sanctioned by the money fuled bureaucrats.

Power to 'em, long may his big jib wave, etc.

P.S. I love watching humpbacks breach. There is something extra special when you are alone but for the breaching whales, observing their exhuberence as the sole human to do so. It's really something.

that's pretty much how I feel. Personally I think Watson is quite an arrogant person and his vegan dreams are so unrealistic, but he's currently on my side so I"d support him.

I'd love to know if he's got a secret stash of meat or something the others arn't aloud to have. Somehow he's eating all that vegan greens and nuts and crap and he still manages to be round.

[Orion Jim]

I would support a cessation of whale hunting, for any purpose, for twenty years then initiate a regulated harvest to be monitored by all interested parties. In twenty years all the current whaling vessels would be rust buckets and if some country was willing to make the investment in new whaling vessels, which I doubt, chances are they'd conduct themselves according to the newly negotiated and monitored harvest limits.
Bluefin tuna should be similarly regulated. Maybe after a 20 year moratorium the current consumers would have lost their lust for this particular species.

[hpeer]

Not a bad idea.

But just to make some comment on the effectiveness of such actions, they are not always fool proof. The (now 22 year old) cod moritorium in Newfoundland, for instance, has not caused the stocks to recover.

Collapse of the Atlantic northwest cod fishery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When the government finally acted, it was too late. The 1992 moratorium was at first meant to last two years, hoping that the Northern Cod population would recover, and along with it the fishery. The damage done to Newfoundland's coastal ecosystem proved irreversible. Even after twenty years, the Northern Cod population has not rebounded[10] and the cod fishery remains closed.

[charliehows]

there are a lot of good people involved in sea shepherd, Paul Watson has used his notoriety as a political tool and more power to him - its for a good cause. If people judge sea shepherd purely in terms of whether Watson is an idiot or not it just demonstrates a shallow and probably cheaply mediated view - Watson is not sea shepherd, sea shepherd is not Watson. I'm not interested in trying to change your opinion 'cos it'll only last til the next program starts. Down here in the south pacific a lot of good people dont like the southern ocean whaling sham, and we dont really care about the thinking coming from north american couches. So they're getting on with some active attempts to stop southern ocean whaling. Watson is just a small part of it but any help is good.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by charliehows

there are a lot of good people involved in sea shepherd, Paul Watson has used his notoriety as a political tool and more power to him - its for a good cause. If people judge sea shepherd purely in terms of whether Watson is an idiot or not it just demonstrates a shallow and probably cheaply mediated view - Watson is not sea shepherd, sea shepherd is not Watson. I'm not interested in trying to change your opinion 'cos it'll only last til the next program starts. Down here in the south pacific a lot of good people dont like the southern ocean whaling sham, and we dont really care about the thinking coming from north american couches. So they're getting on with some active attempts to stop southern ocean whaling. Watson is just a small part of it but any help is good.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Jim Walsh

I would support a cessation of whale hunting, for any purpose, for twenty years then initiate a regulated harvest to be monitored by all interested parties. In twenty years all the current whaling vessels would be rust buckets and if some country was willing to make the investment in new whaling vessels, which I doubt, chances are they'd conduct themselves according to the newly negotiated and monitored harvest limits.
Bluefin tuna should be similarly regulated. Maybe after a 20 year moratorium the current consumers would have lost their lust for this particular species.

20 years for a deep sea species is not long enough for them to recover. Orange Roughy is an example. Our Australian fishery wasn't discovered until the late 70's and by the mid eightys we had just about wiped them out leaving less than 10% of their know stocks.

With whales, I don't know why any commercial fishing needs to occur. There no market for the meat, we don't use the oil any more. Many species have exceptionally high levels of toxins for use as food. And the recovery rate for many breeds of whales is measured in hundred of years, not decades.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

I don't see it as a 'pissing contest'. I see it that grown people should be able to have a discussion around the pro's and con's of such an organisation without the 'pissing'. I think you would agree

One of the aspects of any discussion I find about the good Admiral Watson ( ) is that the 'against' side often quote misleading and/or misleading information in order to refute any positives of the organisation.

For example, how is 'Watson' breaking the Colreg's? The last two campain's he was not involved in. Not that I would deny the Colreg's are being broken, they most certainly are, but any organisation actively stopping poaching, theft, destruction will have to break the Colregs in some way.

And here's an interesting one, why is it that those apposed to Sea Shephered are so keen to point out the breaking of the 'Law' by Sea Shepherd, but fail to mention when the poachers do. There has been some deliverate ramming of Sea Shepherd vessels in the past three years, all caught on film, but theres limited acknowledgment of when this occurs.

And, re the common responses about those 'kids' who crew. 'kids' really? Where does this myth come from Most of the crews are well beyond the 'kids', and if you ever watch the Whale War's tv series, it was also quite clear that most would be in their 30's and above.

So (not aimed at you Cadence), how about a bit of factual information in the debate, without all the emotional accuasations and get down to the what is really happening.

Personally I thank God for them, because if they were not protecting the ocean's, no one else would be.

I totally agree about the discussion. It was the one comment that was meant as an affront to me personally. I was referring to. Not you only one individual. Enough said I don't want to fuel a pissing contest.
I liked Whale Wars initially. And you may be right about the ages of the crew, that's kids to me. Ain't that a bitch. It just started to appear like a cult and vigilante justice. Jim Jones, Watson?

I guess we can agree to disagree about the means not the intent.

[Jammer Six]

Originally Posted by charliehows

...- its for a good cause.

Well, it's for a cause. Whether that cause (like any cause) is good or bad is purely a matter of perspective.

Paul Watson consistently commits the one sin that makes him a joke as an activist-- he's not particularly effective.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Jammer Six

Well, it's for a cause. Whether that cause (like any cause) is good or bad is purely a matter of perspective.

Paul Watson consistently commits the one sin that makes him a joke as an activist-- he's not particularly effective.

Well, that's where we and many others, including the Japanese disagree. 'we' would all say 'they' have been the only effective deterrent out there and the Japanese would say or did say at the High Court, too damn effective. but yeah, let's all agree to disagree on that.

[Jammer Six]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

Well, that's where we and many others, including the Japanese disagree. 'we' would all say 'they' have been the only effective deterrent out there and the Japanese would say or did say at the High Court, too damn effective. but yeah, let's all agree to disagree on that.

As long as he has to stay at sea, he's ineffective somewhere.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by Jammer Six

As long as he has to stay at sea, he's ineffective somewhere.

If in fact the Japanese said it was effective? It might be to keep an eye off an effective means?

Just asking.

[goboatingnow]

There is a reason Watson was expelled from Greenpeace, he's not an ecologist, he's a terrorist. The Japanese whalers had permission until recently to hunt whales, whether you liked it or not. Sea Shepherd is not a law enforcement org and has no jurisdiction to attack other vessels, for any reason. Until recently, Paul Watson was not allowed to set foot anywhere on land, he was wanted by most countries worldwide

Its sad that people write this stuff, for if all of us just accepted the "status quo", or abided by what "authorities" told us to do, then the world would be a far nastier place.

The phase " one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter" has never been truer. Even the term "terrorist" is now banded about like confetti and our fears stoked to allow massive suspensions of civil liberties and freedoms.

The Japanesse had no authority the hunt whales, they regularly flouted opinion and bought up votes to ensure their "scientific research" continued. It is and always was a "scam". and least now its being recognised as that.

I applaud ( but wont be a participator) in direct action clauses, sometimes however amateurish, they are the only way to force change, Its simply undeniable that Sea Shepard and Paul Watson, have brought this issue to the worlds media, such media that without the "fun and games" Paul provided, would ignore the story, and well Paul Watson knows it.

I just love the idea of him and a COLREGS debate , what nonsense.

I thank the gods, we have organisations like Sea Shepard, Greenpeace, Amnesty etc, without them and many other unsung heroes, wed never move totalitarian ideas, and the over-arching profit motive of the worlds commercial organisations.

I certainly wouldn't trust BP, to save me from environmental disasters , would you .