crime

Seized vessel shines light on illegal fishing

8 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

8 Comments
Login to comment

"patrons ask restaurants and shops for the source of their product.

You do that in Taiwan and you will be led to a fishing company whose boats are duly registered and whose fishing permits complete, while the only thing lacking is the crew: the company doesn't need them, their boats meet Chinese illegal? fishing boats at the center of Taiwan Strait where the two boats transship the loot.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Don't really mean to offend anyone, but dubbing 'whale' replacing 'fish' sounded quite interesting though

The toll taken by Japanese pirate 'whale' fishing can’t be overstated...many countries lack the resources to monitor and enforce illegal 'whale' fishing in their waters, and large ships and powerful gear allow Japanese pirates to go farther out on the high seas, meaning, “whale literally have no place to hide.”

0 ( +1 / -1 )

PT24881, what the hell is the point of bring up the whaling issue? The overfishing crisis is an international issue that all countries have a stake in. The "whaling" issue is pretty specific to Japanese politics wouldn't you say?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Romdeau: Because he is Japan bashing. And illegal fishing is a desperate thing for some third world countries that do it to survive. Rough stuff.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The toll taken by Japanese pirate 'whale' fishing can’t be overstated...many countries lack the resources to monitor and enforce illegal 'whale' fishing in their waters, and large ships and powerful gear allow Japanese pirates to go farther out on the high seas, meaning, “whale literally have no place to hide.”

When did the International Court rule whaling to be illegal? Oh wait, they didn't. Because it isn't.

This incident actually backs up Japan's case for "fishing halfway around the world", since plenty of countries legally do exactly that. This is an example of a boat that is not legally fishing halfway around the world.

Illegal argument = red herring; ditto for the Australian phantom sanctuary that is not backed up by law.

Japanese whaling, stupid but legal.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Nessie

This incident actually backs up Japan's case for "fishing halfway around the world", since plenty of countries legally do exactly that. This is an example of a boat that is not legally fishing halfway around the world.

Well based on your argument l guess you would have no issue with Australia fishing around the Senkaku islands after-all Australia doesnt recognize Japans claim therefore doesnt recognize the Japanese EEZ there.

Illegal argument = red herring; ditto for the Australian phantom sanctuary that is not backed up by law.

Sorry there Nessie but the so called Australian Whale Sanctuary is actually supported by 23 countries not just Australia.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Well based on your argument l guess you would have no issue with Australia fishing around the Senkaku islands after-all Australia doesnt recognize Japans claim therefore doesnt recognize the Japanese EEZ there.

Right, I would have no issue with that. But every single country that claims the EEZ would have some issue with it. In the Senkakus the issue is whose EEZ it is; in the so-called whale sanctuary the issue is whether it's anyone's EEZ. Do you see the difference?

Sorry there Nessie but the so called Australian Whale Sanctuary is actually supported by 23 countries not just Australia.

Even more reason to wonder why Oz hasn't taken this to court -- except that they know they would lose.

Here's what wiki says:

Japan has argued that the establishment of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary was in contravention of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) on which the IWC is biased and is therefore illegal... As there is no settlement procedure in the IWC for this type of dispute, Japan has asked the IWC to submit its case to a relevant legal body for analysis. The IWC has refused to do so.

So I'll repeat for the umpteenth time: If Australia's claim is so sound, why are they not pursuing legal redress?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"a stateless ship"

Like the Black Pearl, I'll bet! Arrrrr!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites