Right whale rule wrong, critics sayBy Bo Petersen (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Friday, October 10, 2008
Containerships and the boats carrying harbor pilots to steer them will have to slow down when the nearly extinct right whale could be around, according to a new, hotly opposed federal rule. 
File/Rachel Sayre/Wildlife Trust Three right whales spotted by Wildlife Trust surveyors off of the South Carolina coast last December. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued the rule this week after months of criticism from ports officials as well as local U.S. Coast Guard officials. The officials say slower speeds aren't safe in the narrow, windswept shipping channel. The rule says ships longer than 65 feet must slow to 10 knots (11 1/2 mph) within 23 miles of the Eastern coastline along the whales' migration route, which includes the South Carolina coast in the winter. That's about half-speed for containerships. The cost in lost time is estimated in the millions of dollars per year for Charleston ports, analysts say. The right whale is the rare mammoth of the Atlantic, a huge, 40-ton creature that whalers nearly wiped out in the 19th century. Fewer than 400 are known to exist, a number so perilously low that researchers consider every living right whale vital to the survival of the species. Ship strikes are considered one of the leading causes of right whale deaths. Nearly 40 right whales were spotted in 21 survey flights over South Carolina coastal waters last winter, according to Wildlife Trust. At least nine were considered to have spent the winter here. Ports and pilot officials think the precautions already in place, such as alerting ships to nearby whales, are enough. And there are significant safety concerns with the ruling. Bernard Groseclose Jr., chief executive officer of the State Ports Authority, said a vessel slowing to such a low speed won't have the same control, particularly when dealing with the winds and currents outside the harbor. There has been no reported right whale death from a ship strike in the Charleston channel. A humpback whale stranded in January 2006 on Cape Island near McClellanville died from an apparent ship strike. NOAA says that, on average, two whales per year die from ship strikes. The last reported propeller strike deaths in the Atlantic basin were four in 2006. Local harbor pilots deferred comment to the American Pilots Association. The association is seeking a waiver under an exemption for law enforcement vessels. "We intend to pursue this and do anything we can," said Paul Kirchner, executive director, adding he was shocked by how quickly NOAA issued the rule after the close of the comment period on it. NOAA did take industry concerns into account, said Jackie Savitz, of the environmental advocate Oceana. The change won't be as costly as they estimate. Ocean vessels routinely adjust their times to get in and out of port anyway, she said. "It is important to keep in mind that these whales are endangered, hard to see in the water and impact with ships is often lethal," she said in e-mailed comments. "At 15 knots, 75 percent of strikes are lethal. Going to 10 knots reduces that by two thirds to 25 percent, which shows that this is a compromise." Allyson Bird contributed to this report. Reach Bo Petersen at 745-5852 or bpetersen@postandcourier.com. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 20 comment(s)
Posted by ColdBud on October 10, 2008 at 8:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The Thunderstar is already leaving Charleston and moving to the Gulf because of this law. Expect more boats and ships to change their homeports.
Posted by zekemire on October 10, 2008 at 8:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ridiculous, as are most environmental or wildlife rulings!
Posted by RTC on October 10, 2008 at 8:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
NOAA says that, on average, two whales per year die from ship strikes.
So, based on these findings, ships must slow down?
If production time decreases due to this rule then shipping lines will take their business elsewhere.
Charleston is known for it's high turnover rate making it a popular port.
The economy is in bad enough shape already without driving the ships to other ports.
Posted by Winker on October 10, 2008 at 8:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Yeah, good point guys! Who cares if we if we lose another species to extinction as long as we can still get those cheap products in from China. At least the Charlestonians have there priorities strait.
Posted by CaptKick on October 10, 2008 at 9:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Eat More Sushi!
Posted by jammanofdi on October 10, 2008 at 9:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Is "ColdBud" you Coldbeer? Why the name change?
Posted by justmythoughts on October 10, 2008 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Thar she blows".. Slowing the ships down only means they'll run over the whales slower. It's not like they can yank the wheel to the right or left to avoid hitting them.
Headline:
CONTAINER SHIP AVOIDS WHALE DESTROYS FT SUMTER
2 tourist killed several injured while visiting the fort....
JustMyThoughts....
Posted by majorjohnson on October 10, 2008 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There haven't even been any whale strikes in the area they are reducing speed. Another instance of government stepping in to prevent a non-occurance, and creating a hazard doing so. These ships have to be moving to steer, they don't have tires on the road. The slower they go the more difficult it is to navigate safely. Also, these ships have a window where they can get in and out. Adding 2 hours narrows that window quite a bit. If they have a 6 hour window between tides, you just cut their window to a 4 hour window, not for a single ship but for all the ships trying to get in. Yeah, that could be the difference between coming here or going to Savannah or Norfolk.
Posted by SpiderJohn on October 10, 2008 at 11:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ashley - You are an idiot!
So, because we have manipulated the world and created our picture of EDEN we have the right to cause extinctions?
Remember it was your God that created this world and I am sure he gave man everything he needed to survive and prosper. So, why would we even consider changing what your perfect God created?
Then you get on here and spew out crap about gays and atheists? HYPOCRITE
Posted by buzzinlikealdrin on October 10, 2008 at 12:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would bet my life that 'spankerbuns' is a government employee!!
Posted by ColdBud on October 10, 2008 at 2:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
jammanofdi, the name change is because my old account was booted. I have no idea why, but it was booted.
Posted by justmythoughts on October 10, 2008 at 2:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Remember it was your God that created this world and I am sure he gave man everything he needed to survive and prosper. So, why would we even consider changing what your perfect God created?"
God created man, too. With all our flaws. We are a part of nature and if it is nature's choice to exterminate a species then maybe that is God's will, too. The mistakes we make are a part of the whole process.
JustMyThoughts....
Posted by SpiderJohn on October 10, 2008 at 2:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
WOW just - I'm so glad I don't follow that flawed logic. Why would anyone worship something that isn't perfect?
Why would someone worship anything for that matter?
Posted by ColdBud on October 10, 2008 at 3:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Agreed SpiderJohn.
Posted by suec on October 10, 2008 at 3:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I thought maybe you had signed on Anheiser Busch as sponsor!
Posted by SpiderJohn on October 10, 2008 at 3:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
RAmen ColdBud RAmen!
Posted by cinnabar on October 10, 2008 at 5:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This issue is the stupidest ever, except for the moronic comments of spiderjohn and spankerbuns...How many species do u think have been lost over the millenia? Do you think just because one happens to be in decline during your miserable existance that merits risking the loss of safety and jobs? So a doo-gooder can feel good? Do you want to resurrect the species lost before the industrial revolution?
The misguided enviros don't mind damaging the environment for a new Cooper bridge or a flight to Belize, but are loath to let normal working people pursue their jobs, raise their children and enjoy their life. Those trust funds offer a great springboard for enviro awareness. Stupid hangers-on march in lockstep to make sure the trust funders have nice venues to vacation and clean air in which to fly. For instance...When is the last time you visited ANWAR? When do you plan to go?
If a species is on the edge, how much can it affect the envionment if it is lost? Millions of species have been lost over the millenia. Put your brain in gear and think....
Posted by ironhorse on October 10, 2008 at 5:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This video clearly shows how safe the whales are.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaB0tm0Iy...
Posted by summervillechick on October 10, 2008 at 9:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
get over it! those whales do not know how to move out of the way of ships. MAN is in its environment!
Posted by ironhorse on October 10, 2008 at 9:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
sure can make a lot of candles with the leftovers....