Thursday, 7 October 2010

Anti-Whaling Group Controversy

In January this year a boat owned and operated by anti-whaling group Sea Shepherd was involved in a collision with a boat it was following. Both sides blamed each other. The anti-whaling boat, Ady Gil, sank. Now the captain of that boat has claimed he was ordered to scuttle it to gain sympathy. The group denies ordering him to do so.

However, crucially, there is no denial that the boat was scuttled. A report on Sea Shepherd's website explains that the boat was deliberately sunk by them but it was the captain's final decision and it was probably going to sink anyway.

But at the time they made no mention of the fact that they sank their own boat. Here is their report on the sinking from January. Here is a report from the Guardian. Both give the strong impression that the boat sank as a direct result of the ramming and not because it was scuttled.

How do they explain not telling people?
Rather than create a stir amongst the crews and media, the decision was made (by Captains Watson and Swift) to keep the action as completely confidential as possible.
Sounds fishy to me.


  1. More than fishy. How does a captain of a highly maneuverable and powerful boat allow it to get hit by something slow and not very maneuverable in comparison? Also l note the Sea Shepherd report says the 'vessel was tore in half' ????

  2. Considering the next words are:
    "ripping 5 metres off the front end"
    and the boat was 24m long (see: I think we can safely conclude that they may have been exaggerating.