Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Animal Planet's Whale Wars

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    My opinion is that it is our (human race) duty to make sure the levels of any spieces in the fauna are adequate. That means - to control to avoid over population, but also to avoid extermination. The worst scenario of over population is that spieces extinguish themselves.

    I think this is what the discussion should be about - not wether we do or don't need whale meat, wether it's hunting or killling, or not to mention wether or not whales are more intelligent than other animals.

    Terrorist organisations like the Sea Sheperd or even Greenpeace are destroying good international discussions with their criminal attacks on other vessels and crew.

    I can't say I know much about Japanese whaling, but norwegian whale hunters are under strict regulations and subject of frequent inspections to make sure everything is being done according to international agreements. And for the record - it's been many years since we saw any protests against the norwegian whale hunting.

    Comment


    • #17
      Oooh! I'm vice captain!

      Comment


      • #18
        My opinion is that it is our (human race) duty to make sure the levels of any spieces in the fauna are adequate. That means - to control to avoid over population,
        I see you say it's your opinion, and that's quite ok, because it's not that I want to write about.
        Maybe I start another fire here now, but suddenly (when you wrote this) it dawned on me that it's in fact the spieces "set" to control the population of other spieces on this planet that is seriously overpopulating and making all kinds of little hells all around.

        But of course, I see it as impossible to have it like Sea Shepperds and Greenpeace want...., to let the population of whales just grow and grow into I don't know how many millions of individs at the end.
        I take it for granted it's like in the human world, that there are more born than die...
        "IF GOD COULD MAKE ANGELS...., WHY IN HELL MAKE MAN?"

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Sterkoder View Post
          Maybe I start another fire here now, but suddenly (when you wrote this) it dawned on me that it's in fact the species "set" to control the population of other species on this planet that is seriously overpopulating and making all kinds of little hells all around.

          But of course, I see it as impossible to have it like Sea Shepherds and Greenpeace want...., to let the population of whales just grow and grow into I don't know how many millions of individual at the end.
          I take it for granted it's like in the human world, that there are more born than die...
          Nature is self-regulating. If one species become too plentiful in an area and outstrip their food source the weakest will die of starvation, or get killed by predators. This is natural selection/survival of the fittest. This "rule" doesn't apply to modern humans, however, at least not in the rich Western countries.

          When applied to whales, humans influence the food source by fishing, but don't do their "duty" to control the whale population within sustainable levels. Since whales are on top of the food chain there are few predators to do the culling, therefore the natural selection will be by starvation.

          So Sea Shepherds and Greenpeace is doing their level best to have the whales slowly starve to death to save them from the hunters harpoons and a quick death. Make total sense to some.

          By the way, the death rate is always 100% for all species, including humans.
          Have you heard of anybody getting out of this alive?
          Last edited by ombugge; August 25th, 2009, 05:31.

          Comment


          • #20
            By the way, the death rate is always 100% for all species, including humans.
            Have you heard of anybody getting out of this alive?
            I see the point, and of course I'm fully aware of the deathrate. I know I'm not immortal...
            What I meant, and I'm positive you understood, was that we wouldn't have a growth of humans on this earth if the deathrate was higher than the birthrate in a periode of time. I totally agree with what you write, let there be no doubt.

            ANYWAY (and I belive this will be the last comment from me on this topic); I'm pro whaling the norwegian way and I really like a good whalemeat dinner. That's my view. If someone desides to not like me or any other norwegian for that reason, well..., that's their big problem.
            Last edited by Sterkoder; August 25th, 2009, 07:35.
            "IF GOD COULD MAKE ANGELS...., WHY IN HELL MAKE MAN?"

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sterkoder View Post
              I'm pro whaling the norwegian way and I really like a good whalemeat dinner. That's my view. If someone desides to not like me or any other norwegian for that reason, well..., that's their big problem.

              I couldn't have said it better myself

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Sterkoder View Post
                I see the point, and of course I'm fully aware of the deathrate. I know I'm not immortal...
                Sorry, forgot to put in a few Smilies and a Winky to emphasize that I was making a joke.

                Actually, the fact is that the natural growth of the human population is negative in nearly ALL rich country. Luckily there are somebody more "productive" around who are able to move in to fill the gap, if allowed.
                But that is a different topic and doesn't apply to whales, no matter how intelligent they may be.

                Comment


                • #23
                  No need for smilies...

                  Just wanted to clearify my meaning, and as I said, I agree with your view.
                  "IF GOD COULD MAKE ANGELS...., WHY IN HELL MAKE MAN?"

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I must tell you that Alan has LOVED reading the posts--and he's glad to know that there are intelligent people in the world who can put their thoughts--all sides of the argument- down on paper.

                    "There are a bunch of smart people hanging out with you over there on CV" I believe he said...

                    Could have told him that a long time ago...

                    (and, for the record, I REALLY enjoyed my hvalsteak in Bergen...)


                    and "little" Svein--in re: your comment about it being our duty as the human race...as Alan says "ever see a dolphin build a hospital.."

                    Thanks, everyone!!! Hmm, I wonder what topic Mr. P will throw in here????? I love mental exercise!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Well now that whale hunting has been beaten to death. Lets talk about how the crews operate the vessels (seamanship and professionalism) shown on the TV program, and whether or not their actions are legal.

                      ----
                      On almost every episode I am surprised that members of the Steve Irwin crew have not died or the vessel sunk.

                      How wise and legal is it to intentionally pilot your ship on a collision course with another? It is wise or legal to "play chicken" with ships at sea? Is it wise or legal to pull alongside and throw objects aboard another vessel? If those were warships acting in such a manner there would be shooting and a possible war.

                      If the few episodes I have seen, the Steve Irwin has intentially collided with Japanses ships twice. Dangerous, reckless and illegal in normal waters. Possibly deadly in antarctic waters aboard a small, old vessel.

                      In one episode they had a serious accident while launching a RIB. This is not a new technique. Launching a small boat while underway is not a new technique. It has been done for many decades. Why is the Steve Irin crew trying to "learn how" while at sea in the arctic? Doing so is reckless, negligent and dangerous.

                      In another episode the captain wants to launch a RIB to follow the whalers but the boat is down for maintenance and nobody bothered to tell the captain... They had a ex US Navy sailor onboard and she created a simple checklist for launching the RIB's. What happened... the First Officer throws a temper tantrum. The FO just "wings it" whenever launching souls in a small boat in the antarctic.

                      Don't get me started on the "shooting" that occured in one episode. Funny that the Captain choose to wear body armor that day. Funny that the Japanese used a pistol to shoot ship to ship when they have high powered rifles aboard. Funny that the shot was so accurate over such a long distance (for a pistol) from a moving ship to a moving target. Funny that the one shot that struck the Captain was the only shot fired (no "misses" striking the Steve Irwin were shown).

                      The Japanses vessels appear to be operated in a professional manner. They have anti-boarding procedures operating whenever the Steve Irwin is near. Compare the images of the Japanse crew on deck in uniforms & helmets to the Steve Irwin crew. Which appears more professional? With all the cameras aboard Steve Irwin there has never been a picture of the Japanse aiming a weapon (harpoon or rifle) at the Steve Irwin her helicopter or crew. Like the whaling or not, I would much rather be aboard the Japanese vessels. At least I would know there was a professional crew responsible for my safety.


                      OK someone elses turn.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Yee Haw! Let the fun begin!!!! I like the turn in discussion-Alan will be THRILLED!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I haven't seen this program but it sounds like some sort of "stunts" being performed, rather than legal protests. Both Sea Shepards and Greenpeace are known for this kind of things.

                          Originally posted by pilotdane View Post
                          How wise and legal is it to intentionally pilot your ship on a collision course with another? It is wise or legal to "play chicken" with ships at sea? Is it wise or legal to pull alongside and throw objects aboard another vessel? If those were warships acting in such a manner there would be shooting and a possible war.

                          If the few episodes I have seen, the Steve Irwin has intentially collided with Japanses ships twice. Dangerous, reckless and illegal in normal waters. Possibly deadly in antarctic waters aboard a small, old vessel.
                          It is highly illegal and obviously not good seamanship. If the Japanese reported this to the flag state the Captain on the Steve Irwin should be fined and loose his ticket for recklessly endangering the life of his crew and the others vessel. The proof should be easy to find as it is available on video world wide.
                          Furthermore, whoever is airing this "reality show" should have their license revoked as they are encouraging and condoning such behavior.

                          The Japanses vessels appear to be operated in a professional manner. They have anti-boarding procedures operating whenever the Steve Irwin is near. Compare the images of the Japanse crew on deck in uniforms & helmets to the Steve Irwin crew. Which appears more professional?
                          The answer is self-evident and just shows that the other bunch is reckless "cowboys" who should not be allowed on the high seas, least of all in the Southern Ocean.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            In the final episode of season 2, low on fuel, the Steve Irwin returned to port. When they arrived the Australian Federal Police were waiting on the dock. They seized their cameras, recording equipment and possesions of many crew (probably cameras and computers). The Japanese had reported the incidents to the Australians.

                            Here is an excerpt from the Sea Sheperds website:

                            "The warrant authorized the seizing of "all edited and raw video footage, all edited and raw audio recordings, all still photographs, producer's notes, interview transcripts, production meeting minutes, post production meeting minutes as well as the ship's log books, global positioning system records, automatic radar plotting aid, purchase records, receipts, financial transaction records, voyage information and navigational plotted charts."

                            Here is the complete article: http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-...-090220-1.html

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              The Steve Irwin (IMO No 7340370) is flying a Dutch Flag as far as I can find out. (Or at least she did so when leaving Hobart for last years Antarctic campaign)

                              It should be the responsibility of the Dutch Maritime Authorities to prosecute the Master of this vessel for his reckless behaviour.

                              By the way, I don't think the Dutch allow foreign nationals to command vessels under Dutch flag. As Capt. Paul Watson is a Canadian he may not be in legal command. There is probably a "real" Captain somewhere.

                              Anybody with more knowledge of the facts here?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Ralf__ View Post
                                In my opinion most of the whales must be protected, especially as we don't know much about them. I believe we can learn a lot of them. On the other hand some species have reached reasonable amounts again in the meantime. So in this special cases a regulated hunt seems necessary to keep the "balance" between our needs (or what we think its our need) and the protection of the nature. We're too far into it to let it all run alone. We spoiled to much, so that protection is more complex.
                                There is now much EXTREMELY interesting points of view in this thread and I thank all of you for taking the time to state your thoughts and views... if there are more, please do continue sharing them because I for one, find it very interesting to learn of what you are thinking about the subject.

                                I tend to agree with Ralf, in his above statement, very much.

                                I always think of a phrase I heard often on NG Channel.... it was about the question of why we humans are here (on earth), and what our main purpose here is.... I don't remember the exact details, but the end quote was something like a phrase stating that "humans are the only living occupants on earth which has the ability to both exterminate certain species and the power to protect all species on the planet.
                                With best regards from Jan-Olav Storli

                                Administrator and Owner of CaptainsVoyage.
                                Main page: http://www.captainsvoyage.com
                                Old forum: http://captainsvoyage.7.forumer.com/
                                Join us: Save the "Kong Olav" on facebook

                                Surround yourself with positive, ethical people who are committed to excellence.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X