Relatively speaking, that's not much bail. Approximately the profit from 6 whales.

The people on trial should be the people breaking the laws.

Which is exactly why Paul Watson needs to man up and have his day in court.

I understand his fight to protect species that are endangered. Against people who break the law. But you can not change someones culture that has been on this Earth for thousands of years. He slams Japan for fishing in illegal waters and rightly so. But you can't go through in life just obeying the laws you want to. When you post bail, then flee, that just proves what type of person he is. A criminal on the run.

Hey, Frankfurt authorities ----- What you need to do is enlist the services of a JAPANESE bounty hunter and go after this character. That would be real justice. He has always done his pursuit on a shoestring, enlisting the "aid" of well meaning, but oh so unqualified young idealists to take on the whalers.

Watson cannot simply disappear into the mist. He is not resupplied at sea. If all else fails, lure Captain Watson into the lair by making the whaling processor conveniently "available" to the Sea Shepherd. When Watson gets close, spring the trap with a handful of "sworn" bounty hunters and seize the ship. To stop the whaling, real teeth has to be written into the "research" aspects of the Japanese AND the Norwegians. Anything else is just grist for the "reality" viewers.

Nah, they should hire Dwayne Chapman, aka "Dog the Bounty Hunter" to go after Watson. Dog can find anybody!

Or get killed

The people who volunteer on the activist boats are adults and know what they're getting themselves into. It is volunteer basis and is extreme but necessary. Try putting responsibility where it actually belongs. Don't you know better?

Did you have a point jd? Will being volunteers keep them from possibly killing someone or maybe get killed themselves?

ddpalmer said;

Will being volunteers keep them from possibly killing someone or maybe get killed themselves?

They volunteered. They know the risks. Last year a Japanese whaling ship rammed their experimental superlight craft the Ady Gil and sank it. The captain of that vessel was pulled from the water by the Japanese and taken back to japan, but released after international protest.

The point is that these people know what they are getting into, and they know that they are putting their lives on the line for something they believe in. They aren't shooting guns, assault rifles, etc at the whaling ships, they aren't throwing bombs/grenades. They have never been about killing those who kill the whales, simply to stop them from being able to do what they are planning.

Do they also know they are endangering the lives of others by their antics? I suspect not or they do know and are attempting to accomplish that very feat. Anyone who deliberately attempts to endanger the lives of others upon the sea is not a very moral person nor one I have any sympathy for.

Amanda, please try and get the facts straight.

The collision was 2 and a half years ago. The Japanese did not pull anybody from the water. The captain was tried and found guilty receiving a suspended sentence.

And the point is that first they aren't the only people down their who could be injured or killed and second whether someone is a volunteer or not dead is still dead.

Amanda, I have to disagree with you on the Ady Gil Incident. Many experts have viewed the tapes taken by both Sea Shepherd, the Japanese whaler, and the Ady Gil. After all was said and done, the general conclusion that the resultant collision was the result of poor seamanship and judgement on the part of the Ady Gil crew. They allowed their vessel to get too close to the whaler in some of the most treacherous seas on the face of the Earth. Yes, the Japanese vessel did execute a turn, but by that time the Ady Gil had already drifted too close to get out of the way! The end result was the accident resulted from incompetent and inexperienced crewing of the Ady Gil, despite the supposed experience of it's captain!

So a guy who is fighting for whales who are being legally hunted breaks laws and ignores bond?

And people stick up for this guy?

The last thing we need is another hero who thinks breaking laws is okay to live his dream or whatever and more morons propping him up. Amazingly he wants to make a practice illegal then proves how much he values the legal process himself.

Righteous!!! I want everyone to follow a law that hasn't been created, but I won't follow the ones already on the books.

ddpalmer said:

The collision was 2 and a half years ago. The Japanese did not pull anybody from the water. The captain was tried and found guilty receiving a suspended sentence.

Thank you for that correction--my memory might be a little fuzzy on the exact timeframe.

And the point is that first they aren't the only people down their who could be injured or killed and second whether someone is a volunteer or not dead is still dead.

But a volunteer knows that they take that risk, and while the organization can try to take some of the element of risk away, there's always a chance. i volunteer at an animal shelter in my municipality that is about 65-755 pitbulls, and we all know that as much as they're temperament tested and cleared by the vets,there's a chance that while we're out walking a dog a truck could go by blaring a horn and we can get hurt when the dog gets scared. We also had an incident where a fighting dog was impounded from its owner and the owner showed up at the shelter waving a gun and threatening to shoot volunteers if we didn't give his dog back. We take that risk knowing that our efforts can help save lives. We chose to take that risk. if we die, that's our fault for taking the risk to start with.

brian said;

So a guy who is fighting for whales who are being legally hunted breaks laws and ignores bond?

I don't agree with his skipping bond. I'm upset about this, right now. I'll defend the mission of his organization but I don't agree with his skipping bond. The best way to bring attention to the cause would have been to have his day I court and explain what was being done in Costa Rica was breaking laws.

There has been a UN moratorium (read: ban) on whaling for quite some time now (not exactly sure when the UN resolution passed, but I know it exists.) The people who continue to hunt whales in defiance of the moratorium are the ones breaking the laws first.

That being said, however, two wrongs don't make a right, and while I support the Sea Shepherds' mission I don't always approve of the way they do it. Particularly in this instance.

But Amanda, if one of those pit bulls gets away from you when you are out walking it and attacks someone else who didn't volunteer at the shelter then is it still their fault? No of course not. So again, the SSCS aren't the only ones down there and they aren't the only ones who could be injured or killed.

More fuzzy memeory on your part I guess.

There is no UN ban on whaling. The IWC moratorium (read: temporary pause) was implemented in 1986 and allows for the whaling that Japan conducts, so no laws being broken by the whalers.

ddpalmer said;

But Amanda, if one of those pit bulls gets away from you when you are out walking it and attacks someone else who didn't volunteer at the shelter then is it still their fault?

Dogs at our shelter are walked along a fenced section of road and are not brought into contact with visitors or non-shelter personnel. The few times this has happened the volunteer who was walking the dog that got away and came into contact with (we have NEVER had an attack) non-shelter personnel has been banned from any activities dealing with direct contact with the animals. They work on our website, do dishes, laundry, sort donations, answer phones, register dog and cat licenses, contact breed-specific rescues and take lost dog reports and file and copy paperwork.

Only in one incident was the volunteer not penalized and that was because the dog being walked was picked up as a stray and just happened to be outside getting a walk when its owner came to the shelter to try to find the missing pet.

There is no UN ban on whaling. The IWC moratorium (read: temporary pause) was implemented in 1986 and allows for the whaling that Japan conducts.

From the World Society for the protection of animals;

Commercial whaling was banned in 1986 by the International Whaling Commission (IWC), the body responsible for managing whaling.

The IWC regulates the whaling industry and acts to conserve whale populations. The ban was introduced because some species were in danger of being wiped out.

The IWC has over 70 member countries, including the UK. But two member nations – Norway and Iceland – have lodged objections to the ban which allow them to whale commercially.

Another member, Japan, continues to hunt whales under the guise of ‘scientific research’.

If the Japanese were only conducting 'research' the whale meat would not be in their markets.

We conduct research on whales, tagging and tracking to see what they eat, where they go, how far they travel--and we've all seen nature shows where US, UK, Australian researchers will follow a pod until one dies of natural causes than cut it open to see what it ate, etc. As far as I'm concerned this is what research should look like--there is no need to kill it to find out where it goes or how many of them there are or what its migratory habits are. Killing them negates the possibility of finding out any of those things. You don't need to kill the whole whale for a tissue sample or a blood sample.

Native/indigenous tribes are the only ones allowed to hunt whales and their catch is limited, in some cases to as few as four a year ONLY hunted using traditional methods--spears,etc. I have no problem with those.

The Japanese did not pull the captain of the Ady Gil out of the water, he boarded their ship of his own fruition AFTER the sinking, and it wasn't a year ago.

Also, it is always funny on the show, whenever something remotely dangerous happens to the volunteers to supposedly "know what they are getting into" and are "willing to die to save whales," like getting stuck on a broken down raft at night, getting a leak in their boat, at least one of them has a nervous breakdown and can't WAIT to get to the nearest patch of dry land, and fly home to return back to their eco-blogs.

hiap said;

The Japanese did not pull the captain of the Ady Gil out of the water, he boarded their ship of his own fruition AFTER the sinking, and it wasn't a year ago.

ddpalmer pointed thatout tome in an above post and yes, i do acknowledge that was faulty memory, and he did board the vessel of his own volition. Thank you for the correction.

Also, it is always funny on the show, whenever something remotely dangerous happens to the volunteers to supposedly "know what they are getting into" and are "willing to die to save whales," like getting stuck on a broken down raft at night, getting a leak in their boat, at least one of them has a nervous breakdown and can't WAIT to get to the nearest patch of dry land, and fly home to return back to their eco-blogs.

You never know how you're going to react to any one given situation until it happens. We see it all the time at the animal shelter I volunteer at. People start out as volunteers with good intentions, but when the really bad stuff comes into the shelter, they realize they can't do this.

There was a day a few years back when someone brought in a dog they found on the highway who'd had battery acid poured all over him. He came in with huge chunks of fur and tissue just hanging off him, blood everywhere, and half the volunteers that day left on the spot and never came back.

The same when a municipal trash collector brought in a locked metal safe wrapped around with chains that had been left out for the sanitation workers in 100 degree heat. He swore that he heard whimpering inside and when we finally cut the safe open we found a litter of five newborn puppies left in there to die. Four were dead; one was still alive, barely, and the smell inside made us all throw up. We lost three volunteers that day.

It's all very well to see animal cruelty on TV,but up close is something else entirely. We understand that and we don't fault those who realize they can't handle it.

The point is that yes, if people are hunting whales and "fin-ing" then I hope they do "sleep with the fishes..."

Amanda,
Do you understand the concept of analogy?

If the Japanese were only conducting 'research' the whale meat would not be in their markets

.

You lose again. The IWC regulations REQUIRE the meat from research caught whales to be sold to the extent possible.

As far as I'm concerned this is what research should look like

And who appointed you as arbitor of what is and isn't acceptable research?

ONLY hunted using traditional methods--spears,etc. I have no problem with those.

And another loss for Amanda. Most indigenous hunts use modern methods like explosive harpoons. The IWC consideres this less cruel and directs that these methods be used.

But don't let facts get in your way, I enjoy correcting your mistakes.

oh my, we have another liberal know it all.

No, just somebody who does a little research beforehand.

You guys are focusing on a mistake in memory rather than the point.

Japan uses the guise of "research" to enable full-on killing of whales which go to restaurants within Japan for food. It has NOTHING TO DO WITH RESEARCH. And last time i checked Costa Rica isn't going to give a fair trial to someone who is causing them bad publicity for killing sharks to make shark fin soup inhumanely.

Argue about their tactics all you want but at least they have the balls to stand up for the animals that are getting slaughtered at the hands of an organized and supposedly 1st world country. If you think the whales should be killed they are then keep defending the Japanese in this case.

Amanda-2017567- The thing with Watson is this. He tries to change the culture of some countries and he has no right to interfere. I understand him wanting to chase Japan from waters that are illegal to fish. But when he goes to other countries and demands them to stop their culture is ridiculous. If someone came to you and told you everything you were taught as a child was wrong, would you question it? He invades countries and picks fights and he thinks he is doing something for the greater good, but he is causing more damage.

Save the Whales! Eat the dolphins first.

I would say that the people doing the ILLEGAL shark finning are the terrorists. Plain & simple, they're in the same human toilet as drug dealers, human trafficers and yes, teabaggers.

Not acceptable?! I'm afraid to ask what is acceptable to you. Try waking up and opening your eyes. Sitting in your armchair is doing nothing for anyone.

Patriot - Hard not to agree with you - disrespecting other animal life in a manner like shark finning is agregious. Killing and/or dismembering an animal for a small part of its body is obscenely wasteful. If we are going to take an animal's life we could at least have the decency to take it a little more humanely. Hacking of a fin and dropping it back in the water to die a slow death is obscene. This is an example of the kinds of ways that unfettered capitalism can head off down an undefendable path. Profit for profit's sake without concern for consequence is bad. Maybe Watson's tactics are over the top, but I suspect less in your face tactics produce almost no result in changing obscene commercial fishing behaviours like this and as a species we should expect more of ourselves.

If you disagree, let me ask you if "little green men" started visting Earth and hacking of people's left legs before dropping said people back on the ground bleading out would we think that was ok. Might sound like a silly and unrealistic analogy, but it is functionally equivalent to this situation regardless of the feasibility of it occuring.

Army:

He is a terrorist, plain and simple. His whole group is. Agree with his goal or not, the methods are not acceptable.

According to several countries yes, hes a terrorist. I am therefore guilty of supporting terrorism. Feel free to come and indefinitely detain me under the terms of the NDAA for FY2012.

I have to say that I don't agree with all of his methods. I didn't agree with boarding another ship. However, I also don't agree with killing whales when there is an international ban on them, I don't agree with calling it 'research' when other marine researchers are tagging and releasing.

If the Japanese want the Sea Shepherds to stop harassing their ships, then show us what kind of research you're conducting. The US and other countries all have shows on TV showing what really goes on on their research vessels; what the goal is, how they go about doing it, what sort of safety measures they are taking to protect both human and animal life, and what they have learned from their research.

That being said, Watson has been transparent about what he is doing, why he does it, how he does it, and what he hopes to gain. His crew are willing volunteers, knowing that their two or three boats are going up against ships that are much bigger than they are and that while there is little they can do to seriously damage the other ships, there is serious risk to them if the other ship decides to damage them.

He knows what he is doing is controversial but he holds to his convictions that indiscriminate slaughter of marine life, particularly endangered marine life, in violation of existing laws, is wrong and he's hoping to bring enough pressure to bear on the lawmakers and the lawbreakers that laws already on the books banning these activities will someday be enforced.

I may not agree with all his methods but his group has started bringing attention to an issue that has been ignored for far too long by far too many countries, and so I will continue to support them in whatever way I'm able.

I sometimes wonder if Whale Wars was set up with the same intention as Toddlers with Tiaras--to make people look stupid. That man is chalk full of FAIL and his entire crew seemed to follow his fail lead. If I were an extreme environmentalist I would actually be mad at him for the damage he's done to the causes he tries to champion.

@ Army, legal and right can be very different. Is it legal for a company to freely poison the world as long as they buy unused "credits" from a non polluting companies? Sure is. Is it right? HARDLY.

Far more heroic are those who take aggressive stands against said offenses than anything actually celebrated as heroic by the MSM. Wake up. Those who confront evil doers, even if "protected" by "law", are heroes.

Implacable patriot "I would say that the people doing the ILLEGAL shark finning are the terrorists. Plain & simple, they're in the same human toilet as drug dealers, human trafficers and yes, teabaggers."

Why do you put someone sucking on a scrotum in with drug dealers and human trafficers? Two are illegal, one is only your human nature.

@Amanda: a 'Ban' is not a 'Law', and the IWC has no authority to enforce it's ban on any country who is not a member nation of the IWC. Yes Japan is a member nation, and it is safe to assume that the IWC is aware of what they are doing, and since the IWC has not made a formal protest or took action to stop them from what they are doing; it is also safe to assume that Japan is doing nothing illegal under the IWC agreements.

Now, that being said, I do not agree with what Japan is doing and I can not support what they are doing, however they are not doing anything illegal. The Sea Shepard on the other had, no matter what their moral convictions are, is committing a crime. Illegally boarding another ship at sea is piracy, and piracy is illegal. Watson was arrested, pursuant to a legitimate court order, and was to be remanded for trial. He fled jurisdiction, in order to evade prosecution, and that is also illegal.

Now if the Costa Rican government really wanted to be jerks about it, not saying they would but legally they could, anyone financially supporting Mr. Watson could be legally charged with aiding a fugitive and could face criminal prosecution themselves. He has also put his organization at risk since their assets could be frozen, seized, or could be charged with conspiracy in his criminal activities.

Seems to me his only options at this point are A) Surrender himself to the German authorities or B) risk everything his organization has done over the years.

Dave Wh said;

Yes Japan is a member nation, and it is safe to assume that the IWC is aware of what they are doing, and since the IWC has not made a formal protest or took action to stop them from what they are doing; it is also safe to assume that Japan is doing nothing illegal under the IWC agreements.

Sure they have. See this article from 1999;

LONDON -- Britain has become the latest government to join a growing list of nations calling on the Japanese government to cancel its illegal Antarctic whaling programme.

Yesterday, just days before the Japanese whaling fleet was due to resume whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary (an internationally recognised whale sanctuary surrounding Antarctica) the British Foreign Office advised Greenpeace it had written to the Japanese State Secretary for Foreign Affairs asking for an immediate suspension of the whaling programme.

In other diplomatic moves against Japanese whaling:

Earlier this week the New Zealand Foreign Minister delivered a letter to the Japanese State Secretary for Foreign Affairs, also calling for suspension of �scientific� whaling, and pointing out that much of the data could be collected by non-lethal methods.

In Tokyo, the Australian Embassy made representations to the Japanese Government to protest the hunt.

The US State Department reported it held meetings with a representative from the Japanese Embassy on the day the whaling fleet departed for Antarctica, to express concerns over illegal whaling.

"Japan is facing increasing diplomatic opposition to its illegal whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary in Antarctica," Greenpeace campaigner Dima Litvinov said.

The Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary was established in 1994 by the International Whaling Commission (IWC), and every year since then the IWC has passed a resolution condemning Japan for continuing to whale in the region. Japan was the only country to vote against establishing the Sanctuary and has continued to hunt there under the guise of �scientific research�.

However, the IWC has judged that Japan�s 'scientific' whaling does "not address critically important research needs for the management of whaling in the southern ocean" (IWC 1998).

As well as openly flouting the Southern Ocean Sanctuary, Japan is also breaking international maritime laws (the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea) that require all nations to cooperate with "appropriate international organisations" for the conservation of whales.

From 2005:

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina, November 8, 2005 (ENS) - Thirteen Latin and Southern Hemisphere countries plus Spain signed a declaration today condemning so-called scientific whaling in response to Japan and other whaling countries who ignore the worldwide moratorium on the killing of whales established by the International Whaling Commission (IWC).

From 2007:

Japan's research program was criticized by the IWC Scientific Committee earlier this week. In its report to the plenary meeting of IWC delegates, the Scientific Committee said, there is "little incentive" for Japan to produce data collected from its JARPA whaling program and what data has been shared, "is of little actual value."

"It is quite clear from the JARPA review workshop and subsequent discussions in the Committee that the 18 year JARPA program involving killing 6,796 whales has added little to our understanding of minke whale biology or ecology," said the Scientific Committee, comprised of up to 200 whale biologists, many nominated by IWC member governments.

IWC members passed a resolution Wednesday that calls on the government of Japan to address 31 outstanding recommendations from the Scientific Committee and to suspend indefinitely the lethal aspects of its research program.

The resolution recalls that the IWC has repeatedly requested that Japan desist from issuing permits to conduct lethal research on whales that are protected from commercial whaling.

And this:

The IWC has created rules, in a non-binding resolution, relating to the conduct of scientific research whaling. The resolution asks any IWC member that conducts a research whaling program to demonstrate that the research will provide critical research needs, that the research is needed for management purposes, and that non-lethal research techniques cannot provide the same information. The IWC has issued at least 19 resolutions since 1987, the year Japan began scientific research whaling, condemning Japan for failing to meet these conditions.

From Greenpeace:

Every year, as a reaction to Japan's continued whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary, the IWC passes a resolution condemning Japan, and calling on it to stop the research program. And every year the Japanese whaling fleet ignores IWC resolutions and sets sail to Antarctic waters to take more whales.

UNCLOS requires that Japan cooperate with the IWC with respect to whaling. At present Japan cannot claim to be cooperating with the IWC:

• Japan objected to a near unanimous protectionary measure adopted by the IWC
• Japan ignores the numerous resolutions the IWC passes against Japanese whaling
• Japan ignores the IWC judgment on its so-called scientific whaling program
• Japan continues to whale in the designated Southern Oceans Sanctuary

I could go on but I trust you get the point. Japan has been under fire for decades in regards to their 'scientific research' and yet continues to flout the laws and rules of the IWC that they themselves agreed to be governed by.

I could go on but I trust you get the point.

That point would be that you didn't address the claim that he made right?

The IWC has not made a formal protest or initiated legal action against Japan.

Watching the show is entertaining for sure. I have wondered about all the prop fowlers that they put in the water, what happens to them? Isn't that polluting? It is also funny when the Sea Tards get something thrown at them this is terrible. When they throw or do something to the Japanese that is ok. Why do they want that televised anyway? They look like total idiots.

I was talking about one of his crew members Mitchell stupid Mattlice

IF!!??? He tapes it and brags about it.

Train-Guy, watch one episode of his TV show. It will give all the information needed! I watched half of one episode and refused to ever watch another. It is about the biggest waste of programming on any channel! Paul Watson is a criminal and a coward with a extensive criminal background going back several years. I hope the Germans catch him, lock him up, and throw away the key. The problem is that they will have to wait in line behind several other countries that already want hm. Watson does not care who gets injured or killed so long as his narcissistic egotism and megalomania is satisfied. To him, any ends justify his means!

0123456789, please enlighten us on what international laws are being violated.

And then you can explain what a Costa Rican marine sanctuary has to do with a boat shark finning in Guatemalan waters.

@0-9 you referenced the Coast Guard and the Costa Rican government, they are both legally allowed to enforce laws. An inept man who paints his boats black to play righteous pirate does not have that same jurisdiction. I happen to be a lefty myself, but by your logic the Minute Men down in Arizona are justified in all the crazy stuff they do simply because they think our government isn't doing enough.

1 Opinion, also let us not forget the skull and crossbones pirate flags and emblems blatantly displayed on said black vessels. Just as a side note, I happen to be right leaning and I cannot stand the Minutemen myself! I live on the border in Arizona and on many occasions said vigilante nut cases have been chased out of our town with good riddance!

Boycott, I am think about moving there.

i8f he gets in my way, i'll shoot him in the lips.

Please do, sounds like you'll fit right in.

Maybe you can pick up one of those torches & carry it for a while?

Another armchair critic that does nothing while talking big ideas. So sad to be you!

Can a single one of you show a shred of evidence that Ycaintuseait5-3858621 isn't active in trying to stop human trafficking or unsustainable global farming or inhumane working conditions or even ocean pollution?

Talk about armchair critics.

Which is lazier in the evidence available, the critic or the critic of critics? (Perhaps I am, being the critic of critics of critics.)

Another armchair critic that does nothing while talking big ideas. So sad to be you!

Well, if you don't make movies, you can't critique movies!

If you're not a professional writer, you can't critique any kind of writing at all!

If you're not a painter, don't you dare criticize my paintings!

If you don't have kids, don't you dare criticize that mother that leaves her kid in a hot car to go shopping!

We suspect that any charge against Watson in Costa Rica is almost certainly just a way to try to remove him, and more importantly, the international light he shines on the dreadful practices they condone.

The entire thing smells of a kangaroo court, and he fully well knew this.

Yeah, because no one else in his organization does anything. And if he were removed then the SSCS would collapse.

It is just horrible to consider what will happen when he dies, as everyone does sooner or later.

Something about the phrase "magnificent beings" creeps me out. Unfortunate side note pigs often make top lists of intelligent animals--alas I guess they aren't "magnificent" enough.

True ... I am sure the sharks would be much happier (or even alive) were they simply charged a monetary penalty.

Finning seems more cruel than simply killing them. It is severely and painfully maiming them, and then not killing them .... forcing them to die slowly in great pain, or at best live in a weakened and degraded condition.

'Humanity' at its most ... inhumane.

I don't really understand the point of just getting their fins.

I mean, can't the rest of their bodies be eaten or use in making products?

It just seems like a waste to just take the fin.

Someguy said;

I don't really understand the point of just getting their fins.

Look up shark fin soup.

I mean, can't the rest of their bodies be eaten or use in making products?

Some sharks have very tough, sour-tasting flesh that people don't like. they are also muscle and cartilage and as such are stringy and tough. The fin doesn't have much muscle so it's edible. There used to be a lot of products that could be made from marine life bodies (whale oil,for example, is how whaling got started) but nowadays there are synthetics that work just as well and are cheaper to produce/transport/sell (and don't kill endangered/protected living beings.)

It just seems like a waste to just take the fin.

Exactly why the Sea Shepherds are against the practice! It's a waste. Some species of shark are plentiful, so it doesn't make much of a dent in the population, but it's a waste of life to just take the fin and let the shark die.

Some Guy,

The fins are worth much more by weight than the rest of the body, so by tossing the body the boat can hold many more fins and make more money.

It is a major waste. The meat of the body could be used locally as food. But unfortunately the economics make tossing it more profitable.

Most places that allow shark hunting require that the fins not be removed until the boat returns to port to deal with this issue. But obviously criminals don't follow the laws.

The Voice of Doom said;

Finning seems more cruel than simply killing them. It is severely and painfully maiming them, and then not killing them .... forcing them to die slowly in great pain, or at best live in a weakened and degraded condition.

Finnng kills the shark.

A shark is a fish, not a mammal. It needs to swim, constantly, to keep water flowing over its gills and remain afloat. By cutting off the fins and throwing the rest of the shark back, you're not only causing the shark pain, but it is certainly going to die because it can't swim without its fins.

If it can't swim, it can't breathe. If it can't breathe, it drowns. It would be kinder to simply kill the shark and cut off the fin--but i think i heard somewhere that the flesh degrades very quickly after death and the practice therefore is to cut the fin off the shark while it's still living.

If a shark is thrown back in without fins, they will swim erratically. They then will be killed by other sharks as soon as spotted. If you want the fins for soup, they should take the whole animal. Someone would eat the other flesh.

Unfortunately, it won't be long that all this will be forgotten. The population on earth will be making the oceans, forests and crop lands sterile of food in short order. We will be talking about cannibalizing each other. Maybe that is what Implacable Patriot is talking about when he says teabaggers! Watch out when you go swimming!

The fins are worth much more by weight than the rest of the body, so by tossing the body the boat can hold many more fins and make more money.

I didn't think about this, that kind of makes sense, I guess.

Oh, but they ARRGH pirates!

Ken, after hearing about Watson, being strictly vegan and dedicated tree hugging are probably on the necessary job description list to get on his crew!

But they are not making a profit and it isn't a delicacy. It is found in the grocery store just like any other meat and at similar prices.

Actually to be on his crew you must be Vegan. I've heard the man talk, and yes, his methods are extreme, but sometimes situations call for extreme measures. He's a fascinating man to listen too, and he truly lives what he preaches. If only more people did.

I believe the Costa Rica incident occurred in 2002 ... yes, 10 years ago! This is long before the MV Bob Barker went into service (2009).

When they catch this enviro-terrorist, send him to the darkest cell in Germany.

Until he rots.

He, along with his volunteer crews, are devoted in their cause.

So are Al Qaeda.

So are Al Qaeda.

That's an accurate comparison.

Nope, no hyperbole at all.

Your comparison of the Sea Shephard and Al Qaeda are a pathtic and nothing more than a fallacy. To make such a statement is nothing less than that of a weak minded individual with no ablity to debate the issue in a polite and adult manner. Try harder...better yet, think before you type.

Yet, Watson obviously didn't think he'd get a 'not guilty' verdict.

Why else jump bail?

He, along with his volunteer crews, are devoted in their cause.

So are Al Qaeda.

Touched a nerve with the liberals, eh?

Sooo, you have a issue with Watson himself?? Sounds like a personal thing to me. But than you make a retarded statement about the crew being just like Al Qaeda? Sorry, but you better back that one up, othwerwise you just sound like a dumba--s. Opps...to late. But for someone who arrogantly assumes that my response is that of a liberal makes me believe that your education could be lacking thus catering to a neverending long drawn out spat with someone who can't debate with dignity. Stick to Hot-Pockets and X-Box, and let the adults here discuss the issue.

Well Michael obviously you do need an expert to conclude what happened. And luckily the experts did come to conclusions based on the facts not on what they think the video shows.

The coxswain of the Ady Gil testified that they Ady Gil was not 'almost adrift'. He also testified that he accelerated forward (in front of the Shonan Maru2) just prior to the collision. Both of these statements are backed up by the Ady Gil's electronic recorder.

The facts and electronic recorders also show the Shona Maru2 turned over 2 minutes before the collision and then maintained a steady course and speed, giving the Ady Gil sufficient time to react.

And finally simple math shows that if the Ady Gil hadn't accelerated the Shonan Maru2 would have passed close to but not collided with them.

Different people see different things. It is an undeniable fact that the Ady Gil was provocativelymaneuvering far too close the the Japanese vessel. If the had not been that close, the collision would not have occurred! I stated above that I do do not deny the Japanese turned. The Ady Gil was already too close to begin with! I spent years living and working in and around Antarctica and am very familiar the type of seas involved. As I stated above the currents down there are some of, if not the most treacherous on the face of this planet. It is no place for the grandstanding antics that Watson and his people are so well known for!

D Palmer, perhaps I should not have stated "almost adrift". What I should have said was that was that while the Ady Gil May have had their engines fully engaged, they were possibly and momentarily caught in a strong back current that considerably slowed their forward momentum between them because of their close proximity to the Shonan Maru2. These types of currents and eddies are quite common in that part of the world. As I said above, either way they were still far to close to the Japanese vessel and in violation of maritime law regarding maneuvering too close another vessel and doing so in dangerous waters.

over-breeding colored people

Racist much?

ddpalmer, what is the difference between racist and realist? We have at list 7 billions people (and counting) on this planet. How many of them are white people and how many are colored? Give me the percentage using mathematics not emotions. And no racism please just math!

Cassandra, if you have to try to split hairs like that to justify your comment, then you definitely fall under the former and not the latter!

cassandra said:

And after all those over-breeding colored people will kill all animals on this planet, what do you think they are going to eat next? They will eat you, idiots, the white people, and they will have no mercy on you either.

Wow. Cassandra, I've run across some extraordinarily ignorant comments from you before and tried to bite my tongue but this time I'm going to take the bait you've so nicely dangled in front of me (I'm aware that personal attacks are forbidden on Newsvine, and I may be suspended.)

Overbreeding colored people? Last time I checked, white was a color. And besides, you're not white, you're sort of a peachy-pink, and you turn red when you're angry, yellow or green when you're sick, brown when you're dirty, blue and black when you bruise, so you're most definitely some sort of color yourself.

Cannibalism is certainly not confined to the 'overbreeding colored people', as you so colorfully put it. Did you miss the story on MSN earlier that said a (white) guy in FL talked to another pedophile online abut a little boy at his church who he particularly liked, and sent emails discussing how he would kidnap, molest, and then give this boy a choice of how he wanted to be cut up, prepared, and eaten?

@Amanda, OK. Lets make it more clear, the Caucasian people, not white. So colored would be all the others, Asians, Africans, Hindus, Hispanics, middle-easterns you name it. And most of Caucasians live in Europe, North America, Australia, New-Zealand. I believe Caucasians make about 1 billion people. But you tell me, since you are definitely more knowledgeable than me. And we know the number of Caucasians since they live in countries where people have good education and they can count. But who did count all the Africans, or Indians, or Asians? Did you? So all who have common sense realize that there are actually more than 7 billions, may be 8-9. So 1 billion Caucasians and 7-8 billions make the rest. I call them colored because I combined them all in one group, and their skin is darker than the skin of Caucasians. But I am not running for the president of "US of Idiots" so I don't have to be politically correct. But you Amanda probably are dreaming of replacing Obama so you definitely should be careful not to hurt the feelings of all those who are trying to be more holy than the Pope.