Both ship captains to blame in whale protest sinking: NZ gov't report

Wonder why people DEMAND an investigation than TOTALLY disregard the findings of 2 only to keep spouting the same stuff as when they demanded the Investigations.

Shakes head in disbelief.

A vessel that repeatedly and delibertly cuts across the bow of another vessel is bound to be involved in a collision

The collision in question didn't occur because the Ady Gil was cutting across the bow of the Shonan Maru 2. This could not possibly be considered a mitigating circumstance.

stevecpfc - If Japan did not insist on doing whatever it likes re these matters the crash would nevr have happened. Whatever any report says about this crash the Japanophiles will always find whatever reason to support the whalers. Sad, very sad, but true.

HAHAHA, The whalers have a legal right to be there. Eco-terrorist Watson is only there on his "own" authority which amounts to nothing more than piracy.

thundercat - Wrong. How did any actions taken in the days before the accident cause the collision?

Mitigating circumstances. Bethune's prior actions proved that the AG was continuously being operated in a dangerous and unsafe manner. A vessel that repeatedly and delibertly cuts across the bow of another vessel is bound to be involved in a collision.

Ah so you ignore a factor which would significantly influence a judge and jury's decision in any court of law in any developed country.

Wrong. How did any actions taken in the days before the accident cause the collision? If anything, looking at what happened prior to the collision only points to the Shonan Maru captain's motive for running the boat down. Claiming that you were provoked into assaulting someone is not a defense I would recommend using.

Many won't have heard of international agreements such as the Madrid protocol. This designates the Antarctic as a 'natural reserve, devoted to peace and science'.

Read annex II.

a culture which demands to grab whales from the other side of the globe... tell us what you really think about that...

I'm fine with it as long it's sutainable.

Haha, you walked into that one, didn't you. I oppose that trade... so what's your point?

Well if you're talking about saving the pristine environment, you ought to start there and keep on ranting until the trade stops. Shonan Maru should be the least of your concerns.

arrestpaul at 10:18 AM JST - 19th November "foxkenji - Wow that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. What course and speed??? Fact is the Ady Gil was out of fuel and was floating with its engines off." Not according to the video or the finding of Maritime New Zealand. I >wonder why their facts don't agree with yours?

The Australian Maritime Safety Authority investigation also found no such conditions with regard to the Ady Gil. Come to think of it, neither SSCS nor Peter Bethune ever even claimed that. Where did you get that utter nonsense?

thundercat at 10:46 AM JST - 19th November Ossan, I don't understand your position... oh wait, you haven't made one >because you're too busy trying to shoot down other people's opinions. >C'mon, take a stance and post something meaningful instead of just going >after other posters.

Please try reading what I wrote. My position couldn't be more clear.

BTW, I don't care how much provocation there was... Are you saying that >someone who isn't mature enough to handle someone's taunts are justified >to assault them?

Ah so you ignore a factor which would significantly influence a judge and jury's decision in any court of law in any developed country. Good luck with your life.

it's clear that japan is not hunting on Victorian levels.

Nobody said they were.

So what does Japan bring to the table? A huge Victorian-era style killing fleet, burning 1000s of tonnes of gasoline to travel to the far ends of the earth to greedily grab whales for oyajis in izakayas... spitting in the face of every single one of the countries nearest to the Antarctic...

But they don't do they? It's clear that japan is not hunting on Victorian levels. They are doing a level of sustainable fishing. It may not be something you agree.

Japan looks foolish to the world and also very stubborn. If Japan did not insist on doing whatever it likes re these matters the crash would nevr have happened. Whatever any report says about this crash the Japanophiles will always find whatever reason to support the whalers. Sad, very sad, but true.

Because it's open seas.

Many won't have heard of international agreements such as the Madrid protocol. This designates the Antarctic as a 'natural reserve, devoted to peace and science'.

What a wonderful document! Isn't it amazing that, in this world filled with greed and hate, countries could agree to such a beautiful thing... and remember, this agreement also manages to ban mining down there.

So what does Japan bring to the table?

A huge Victorian-era style killing fleet, burning 1000s of tonnes of gasoline to travel to the far ends of the earth to greedily grab whales for oyajis in izakayas... spitting in the face of every single one of the countries nearest to the Antarctic...

Well done, Japan! So great to see you keeping in the spirit of the Madrid Protocol.

Advancement in technology.

A country imposes its values on a pristine environment on the other side of the earth, and then has the bare-faced cheek to turn around and tell people, oh, it's "our culture". And the only response you have is a lame attempt at a joke... sad really.

Come on now, tell us, what do you have to say about Japan's repeated cries of "food culture, food culture, food culture"... a culture which demands to grab whales from the other side of the globe... tell us what you really think about that...

I'll tell you what I think... if my country and government was claiming a culture which needed to be supported by grabbing beautiful creatures from the other side of the globe I would want nothing to do with that culture, because it's not culture, it's just greed and arrogance...

Maybe you should lobby the Australian/NZ government to stop importing/exporting via ocean cargo.

Haha, you walked into that one, didn't you. I oppose that trade... so what's your point? Try to elevate your arguments above the high school debating club level.

Why on earth is Japan even in the Antarctic?!

Because it's open seas.

Since when did Japan's food culture include areas on the other side of the planet??!!

Advancement in technology.

Think of all that gasoline they are burning to get their huge Victorian-era fleet all the way down there.

Maybe you should lobby the Australian/NZ government to stop importing/exporting via ocean cargo. The fuel used by Shonan Maru virtually amount to nothing compared to what's being burned via trade.

Why on earth is Japan even in the Antarctic?!

They are always going on and on about needing whales for their precious food culture...

Since when did Japan's food culture include areas on the other side of the planet??!!

Remember this is a pristine wilderness environment... it's sheer greed on the part of the Japanese to demand to take whales there. Think of all that gasoline they are burning to get their huge Victorian-era fleet all the way down there.

It's completely out of step with world opinion, and also out of step with all the countries nearest to the Antarctic, countries who naturally consider this area to be their neck of the woods.

Count them on your fingers... every single one of them opposed to whaling... South Africa, Argentina, Chile, Australia, New Zealand...

How incredibly arrogant and nasty of Japan to ignore their opinions.

And for what?! So a few oyajis can get a plate of whale in an izakaya. What's more important for the Japanese? Making friends with their neighbors on the world stage or those izakaya oyajis? It makes one wonder if there is not a reason why Japan is having so many disputes with its neighbors!!

Take whales closer to home Japan and get out of the Antarctic. It's an environmental wonderland down there... why can you only see it as a place to plunder...?

In the article it says: Investigators found there was insufficient evidence to say whether the Ady Gil's helmsman's acceleration of the ship before impact contributed to the crash.

If you can't find it just google that exact phrase. And see what the first link is.

So please don't make out that i'm making false claims.

Direct quote from the article you say you are quoting from:

"The report says the Shonan Maru No. 2 kept at an unsafe speed and turned starboard to put itself in a collision course with the Ady Gil."

"As the overtaking vessel, the Shonan Maru was responsible for avoiding a collision and had sufficient room to do so, the report says."

"Mr Bethune should have kept well clear of the oncoming whaling vessel, but instead maintained his course and speed, the report says."

So the Ady Gil maintained course and speed and the Shonan Maru 2 turned into it resulting in the collision. Nowhere does it say that the Ady Gil changed direction, sped up, went forward or whatever else you claim it did.

Well no matter how you see it. The Shonan Maru would have missed the Ady Gil if it weren't for those idiots at the last minute going forward to make it happen. That part in itself was completely ignored by the biased Kiwis. They believe that whaling is so wrong that they just can't accept the criminal behavior by a group that opposes what they hate.

My comment is what the New Zealand Herald reported.

In the report it said that there was insufficient evidence to say whether the Ady Gil's helmsman's acceleration of the ship before impact contributed to the crash.

You must have been reading the wrong report. It clearly stated that the Ady Gil maintained course and speed INSTEAD of getting out of the way and that is why they are partly to blame. Nowhere does it state the the Ady Gil accelerated into the path of the Shonan Maru 2. What is established is that the Shonan Maru 2 made an abrupt turn putting it on a collision course Ady Gil.

Cleo, your analogy said moving slowly.

The report said that the Helmsman wasn't paying attention to the radar which basically meant they weren't looking at what they were doing.

You drive slowly when you're not looking at where you're going and it is driving without due care and attention.

There's a reason why the NZ government report says that both captains were at fault.

Cleo.

As was said before you CANNOT park at sea, you can drop anchor but than there are things you need to do to show that you dropped anchor. Details in the Maritime Law.

If you are anchored you have no engine under power and it will take quiet some time to get moving. Haul the anchor in, start the engines, etc.

So your parking comparison don't apply.

if you're not looking at where you're going and you get hit by another vehicle it is your fault.

Even if you're parked, in an empty car park? And the other vehicle comes up from behind? And has ample opportunity to avoid the close quarters situation that subsequently developed, but failed to do so? and also “failed to take positive and ample action to avoid colliding?

the report confirmed the Shonan Maru No. 2 had made an abrupt turn seconds before the impact.

Taj, that's a very good point. JT there is no report on the sinking of the Ady Gil (though there should be) by the New Zealand government, what they have released is their findings on the collision.

If the 18-wheeler ran over the sports car when it was parked in the middle of a huge empty car park - or even moving slowly through the car park - and the 18-wheeler made a bee-line for it, I don't see how the 18-wheeler isn't at fault.

But if you're not looking at where you're going and you get hit by another vehicle it is your fault. Even if the other vehicle drives the wrong way down a one way street. If you don't take evasive action because you've not been paying attention then you would, in some countries, be charged with driving without due care and attention.

In the report it said that there was insufficient evidence to say whether the Ady Gil's helmsman's acceleration of the ship before impact contributed to the crash.

Which is a bit strange really. Especially when you consider the amount of times it was claimed on here that the AG was not accelerating at the time of impact.

Both ship captains to blame in whale protest sinking: NZ gov't report

Editor: I haven't read the full findings, but according to the article both ship captains to blame in whale protest collision according to the NZ gov't report, not the sinking. Watson and Bethune blame both admit that the sinking was done by Bethune, after the fact. They disagree on whose initiative he scuttled the vessel on.

what malarchy. the Andy Gil was there to impede the whaling ship. that in itself was never considered?

People also overlook that NOT posting an outlook is against Maritine Law.

But lets here what the Japanese Goverment and SS has to say.

Well no matter what's said. It really came down to SS being responsible for their own ship putting it in peril like they did. Wonder how the insurance company saw it. Anyone know if they collected on that?

Like if you take your sports car and start driving circles around an 18 wheeler then saying it ran over your hood on purpose

If the 18-wheeler ran over the sports car when it was parked in the middle of a huge empty car park - or even moving slowly through the car park - and the 18-wheeler made a bee-line for it, I don't see how the 18-wheeler isn't at fault. Regardless of what the sports car was or wasn't doing earlier in the day. (To keep the analogy going, let's say earlier in the day the sports car had been running rings round the 18-wheeler in an attempt to stop it going the wrong way up a one-way street. Maybe not the best way to deal with the situation, but there are no traffic cops in the area to deal with the 18-wheeler.)

It sounds to me like one guy throwing a punch and the other guy being equally in the wrong because he didn't duck in time. Amazing.

Moderator: No more analogies please.

Ossan, I don't understand your position... oh wait, you haven't made one because you're too busy trying to shoot down other people's opinions. C'mon, take a stance and post something meaningful instead of just going after other posters.

BTW, I don't care how much provocation there was... Are you saying that someone who isn't mature enough to handle someone's taunts are justified to assault them?

foxkenji - Wow that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. What course and speed??? Fact is the Ady Gil was out of fuel and was floating with its engines off.

Not according to the video or the finding of Maritime New Zealand. I wonder why their facts don't agree with yours?

thundercat at 08:45 AM JST - 19th November Sorry Ossan, you got it all wrong about me on this issue. If you ever >read any of my previous posts you'd see that I've never taken an anti->whaler position. In fact, when I read the headline of the article my >first reaction was "Finally, both sides can take their fair share of the >blame and move on". Then I read the article and logic took over. If you >read the findings of this report their is no way you can conclude that >both parties share equal blame.

You're right. One party was conducting "reasearch whaling" as authorized and sanctioned by Artcle 8 of the IWC rules, whether anyone likes it or not. The other party calling it illegal and acting without any jurisdictional authority whatsoever conducted a campain of harassment and interference of their operations in dangerous waters. THey should't even havbe been there to start with.

I stand by my original analogy. Punching someone in the face, and then >claiming you are not at fault because they could have gotten out of the >way is quite strange, don't you think? One party is clearly the >aggressor and one is clearly the victim.

Deliberately provoking and interfering someone conducting legal operation without any legal authority and crying that you got hit is also strange don't you think? But I agree, Sea Shepherd was clearly the aggressor. Interstingly Sea Shepherd considers Peter Bethune at fault for failing to take any evasive action after theirt harrassment operation. Sorry thundercat but I have to actually agree with Paul Watson on this one.

Sorry Ossan, you got it all wrong about me on this issue. If you ever read any of my previous posts you'd see that I've never taken an anti-whaler position. In fact, when I read the headline of the article my first reaction was "Finally, both sides can take their fair share of the blame and move on". Then I read the article and logic took over. If you read the findings of this report their is no way you can conclude that both parties share equal blame. Here are some excerpts:

"The Shonan Maru No. 2 kept at an unsafe speed and turned starboard to put itself in a collision course with the Ady Gil." "As the overtaking vessel, the Shonan Maru was responsible for avoiding a collision and had sufficient room to do so."

I stand by my original analogy. Punching someone in the face, and then claiming you are not at fault because they could have gotten out of the way is quite strange, don't you think? One party is clearly the aggressor and one is clearly the victim.

Every wonder why they were all sitting in the back of the boat? Why they didn't make any effort to put it in reverse? Big boats "generally" are incapable of changing their course very quickly. Small boats however....

Why would Bethune do such a thing beyond the obvious sympathy play is a difficult fundraising environment? Perhaps Bethune scuttled his craft to either get out of the payments to the bank or collect insurance money. I hope we find out!

Anyway, there are “rules of laws” which might apply if you have the time or money to waste pursuing a remedy. However, the “rule of common sense” says you mess with people long enough, you will eventually pay a price. Bethune is lucky he didn’t kill crew with his stunt! Bethune is a reckless pirate!

"once the vessels were at close quarters, the captain of the Ady Gil 'failed to respond by taking appropriate evasive action—choosing instead to maintain his course and speed, which allowed the close quarters situation to develop into a collision risk'"

Wow that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. What course and speed??? Fact is the Ady Gil was out of fuel and was floating with its engines off. The Shonan Maru had all the space in the world it wanted but chose to go directly in the direction of a standing vessel. How is Bethune supposed to move out of the way? paddling an 800ton ship?? that makes no sense at all.

Repeatedly playing chicken with ships in ocean waves and currents was an invitation to disaster.

Yes I agree. The Ady Gil was there to come close to and foul the screws of the Whalers so it was the one in the wrong right off the bat by playing chicken with a larger vessel. Like if you take your sports car and start driving circles around an 18 wheeler then saying it ran over your hood on purpose is just spoiled children crying over when their plan doesn't go their way. Or just want to demonize the other side. When all along you should know better than playing with fire. I picture a chihuahua barking at an elephant and getting trampled under it's foot. Should have stayed away if you didn't want a bad result.

I wouldn't expect any less blatant waffling/fence straddling action by the current NZ government that is dismayed by the facts that more and more Japanese tourists are abandoning their country for Australia after realising what a hole NZ is, and at home the left-wing opposition including the Green Party are making significant gains in the polls.

Government safety agency Maritime New Zealand said in a report released Thursday that the captains of both the Ady Gil and the whaler, the Shonan Maru No. 2, “were responsible for either contributing to, or failing to respond to the ‘close quarters’ situation that led to the collision.”

The number one rule of maritime law is that both captains are to do everything possible to avoid a collision. Repeatedly playing chicken with ships in ocean waves and currents was an invitation to disaster.

good non-decision. typical

smithinjapan at 10:25 PM JST - 18th November "Ossan: "Just can't let it go huh?" Nor can you, clearly,

Really? Show me where I deny that the Whaler was not at fault. Or where I state that the Ady Gil wsa entirely at fault. As usual you can't because you habe a bad habit of fabricating arguments by putting words into other posters mouths. Since you obviously aren't aware, Paul Watson himself has stated that Bethune was at fault for failing to take any evasive actions.

as is evident by your posting on the subject and added to by the fact >that you cannot admit it even MAY have been both captains' faults.

What part of "moot point" do you not understand?

How about this for a compromise we would ALL be happy with: The respective captains of the Shonan Maru, Ady Gil, Japan Coast Guard Vessel (from the Senkakus) and the Chinese fishing skipper - are all deliberately shipwrecked on an uninhabited island in the Pacific. We all sit back and laugh watching them fight for survival on a reality-TV show. None of them are ever permitted to come back to civilisation. We've all had enough of them already!

smithinJapan.

What are you babbling about?

Ossan: "Just can't let it go huh?"

Nor can you, clearly, as is evident by your posting on the subject and added to by the fact that you cannot admit it even MAY have been both captains' faults.

Zenny11: "So 2 findings so far: Australia = inconclusive(no party alone was found guilty), NZ = Blame goes to both sides."

You prove my point exactly, at least in terms of the Japan-side refusing to take any blame in this. In fact, you don't mention Japan at all -- it's like you're a Japanese historian all of the sudden and Japan was never actually there. Actually, sorry, if you that were the case you would be writing about how they were victimized.

Regardless, if you truly want to be fair:

Australia: Inconclusive NZ: Both captains are at fault Japan: YOU ARE INTERFERING WITH CENTURIES OLD TRADITION! Oops, sorry. I mean, 'not our fault at all'.

thundercat at 03:07 PM JST - 18th November I love it. The captain of the Shonan Maru 2 is guilty of deliberately >turning into and running over the Ady Gil and Bethune is guilty of not >getting out of the way... and yet we are to believe that both captains >are equally responsible for the collision?

Just can't let it go huh? Now that Bethune and Watson don't want to have anything to do with each other the whole issue is a moot point. Legitimate anti-whaling groups have all condemned Sea Shepherd and their actions. Perhaps it's time some folks to wake up and smelled the coffee.

I suspect though this court in New Zealand though is doing (or not) its business surrounded in an air of bias.

I like whales as much as the next western guy, but I am happy that Buthane's boat was destroyed and that legitimate conservation groups view him as the pirate he is! Buthane is an idiot, and even though I understand he is a Kiwi, I dislike him and people like him immensely. I look forward to a day when no one cares what his opinion is!

So 2 findings so far: Australia = inconclusive(no party alone was found guilty), NZ = Blame goes to both sides.

Like we really trust this impartial report.

in other news: bbccouk/news/world-asia-pacific-11490958 "An estranged former member of direct action anti-whaling group Sea Shepherd alleges it ordered its own boat to be scuttled to win public sympathy"

Duh! Of course they are both to blame. I could understand an accident between cars on any road. I could understand how two nuclear submarines could collide with each other in such a vast ocean because their state-of-the-art sonar technology would make them invisible. I still cannot understand how, in such a big ocean with so much space to maneuver, could a fishing ship ram a high tech speed boat. Unless of course they both intentionally did it.

PFFFT! Nah, we all know full well both sides will deny the result.

Buthane accepted the decision but said the Japanese will most likely not. He also said that he wants to come back to Japan after 5 years and have a beer with the Shonan Maru Captain.

The spin in the online New Zealand news is somewhat different.

I'm sure both sides of this will accept the ruling of the NZ government and mutually work together for future harmony and progress on the issue.

PFFFT! Nah, we all know full well both sides will deny the result.

I love it. The captain of the Shonan Maru 2 is guilty of deliberately turning into and running over the Ady Gil and Bethune is guilty of not getting out of the way... and yet we are to believe that both captains are equally responsible for the collision? I'm glad that in the real world victims don't have to share equal blame with aggressors. It's like saying "I'm going to throw a punch at you and if you don't get out of the way it's your fault too"... it just doesn't make any sense.