|
|
Post by frankly on Jan 16, 2015 6:44:11 GMT 12
The media are reporting the decision on how to handle the situation was left to the Captain. It's easy for armchair puddle pirates to criticise from a distance.
Non-permissive boarding operations from small boats are tricky at the best of times, without having a significant swell to deal with. Best case scenario if a boarding is achieved is that the vessel is seized. That best case scenario comes at a risk to Navy personnel.
With the evidence that has already been gathered, there should be sufficient proof of illegal activity to impound the vessels at the first port they enter. That scenario comes at no risk to Navy personnel.
Why take the risk?
Firing warning shots at the fishing vessels might make them stop. Or it might not. If they don't stop, then Navy would need to be prepared to fire on the vessels. The consequences of which include death or dismemberment of foreign nationals, and a potential pollution problem in the Ross Sea.
It wasn't that long ago people were breathlessly demanding government does something about the working conditions crews on foreign fishing vessels were subject to. It's pretty rich that some of the same people complaining are prepared to shoot them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 16, 2015 7:11:06 GMT 12
The big picture here is our Navy have failed to achieve anything when attempting to carry out one of the core reasons for their very existence, protecting fisheries, and the whole world has been watching. Whoever made the decision, and no matter what was said, it looks bad to the outside world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 16, 2015 8:01:16 GMT 12
What good is gathering evidence when you're not stopping the illegal fishing nor bothering to take the sailors into custody? Pointless. These ships have allegedly been active in illegal fishing for ten years. That tells me other people have 'gathered evidence' on them in the past.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jan 16, 2015 9:23:37 GMT 12
The big picture is that there isn't one, but the navy sinking an unarmed, albeit criminal, fishing vessel would surely lead to international condemnation of New Zealand on a massive scale. Now that would be a big picture, in which we as a nation would be squirming in the spotlight of world opininion for what would be a gross overreaction and violation of individual rights. While the Captains of these ships mught well be criminals given their employers, the fishermen are simply that, ordinary people taking work anywhere they can find it in order to feed there families. As NZ is now a member of the Security Council of the UN, I'd pay money to hear and watch our representative on that committee explain why we just killed a whole lot of innocent fishermen. The only option available to NZ is the legal one, and that's what Wellington did: prove the case, argue it on the world stage.
|
|
|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Jan 16, 2015 11:27:38 GMT 12
I'm not in the navy myself but I'm a little bit embarrassed by this.. Wasn't the whole point of these OPV's to go out and find boats such as these? We're a fighting force for goodness sake. I hope the approach would have been different if they were in our EEZ. People are seeming to gloss over the very pertinent fact that they aren't. Do you want navies killing sailors (because there is no point in firing across bows if you aren't willing to take the next step) if they see them doing something that they deem illegal while the ship is in international waters? I agree with Errol. This is a different situation in view of it occurring in international waters. The 1976 event was well inside our EEZ when the Taiwanese squid boat elected to do a runner, until the captain was persuaded otherwise by 20mm cannon fire in the water in front of his ship. The decision is with the captain of the Wellington and he should be supported in that, at all levels of the Defence Force and Government. He should also be supported by the public. taking armed action against a civilian ship is no small matter and we can only hope that they have in fact obtained sufficient evidence for the law to take it's course, unlike when the Australians pursued a similar fishing boat a few years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2015 16:41:56 GMT 12
Terribly sorry, I must have missed the part about it not being in our EEZ.  Feeling a tad sheepish. |
|
zolteg
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by zolteg on Jan 16, 2015 19:21:38 GMT 12
What I still fail to understand, given that a) we have found these vessels, b) observed them breaking international law by fishing illegally *and* unlawfully flying a flag they're not entitled to, and c) have a navy with a RAS capability, why the hell was the Wellington pulled out? Why isn't Endeavour out there to refuel the Wellington? Why haven't we called on the Australians to take over the picket, given that these vessels are in fact in Australian claimed waters? Why can't we borrow a tanker from the Aussies, if Endeavour's not available?
Agree that whilst it might be satisfying on many levels to throw a few HE rounds at the offenders and sail away, why can't we continue to shadow the vessels, and ensure they're arrested when they return to port - any port. Maintain the chain of evidence by keeping them in optical or electronic sight, and bust their arses when they head back for civilisation.
Also agree with sentiments that the CO's wearing a bit much on his shoulders for not opting to board - we're all armchair warriors thousands of clicks away....he's on the scene, and his priority's gonna be the safety of his people. But we should be doing more to ensure a lawful capture is effected on these thieves. Otherwise it's yet another dent in our credibility as a nation...
|
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jan 16, 2015 20:32:34 GMT 12
Wellington wasn't "pulled out". It needed fuel and had to leave for home.
|
|
zolteg
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 82
|
Post by zolteg on Jan 16, 2015 21:40:39 GMT 12
Wellington wasn't "pulled out". It needed fuel and had to leave for home. The point I'm tryin' to make Phil, is with a RAS capability, why wasn't it replenished on station? </armchairwarrior> |
|
|
|
Post by nzcrash on Jan 17, 2015 8:38:19 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by frankly on Jan 17, 2015 8:55:36 GMT 12
The point I'm tryin' to make Phil, is with a RAS capability, why wasn't it replenished on station? has only just completed a refit and is still working up. We've got one tanker, it can't be everywhere. Wellington was in Hobart from New Year's Eve. She has had two weeks on station already. Transit there and back and heavy weather mean that's about the limit of endurance unsupported. Hobart to Ross Sea 1300NM
14 days patrol @ 12kts = 4000NM Ross Sea to Bluff 1300NM
Total 4600NM + 4-5 days reserve fuel = 6000NM
It shouldn't be hard to reacquire the boats if it's actually necessary (I'm not convinced it is). |
|
|
|
Post by nzjet on Jan 17, 2015 9:21:27 GMT 12
Wouldn't be a issue if we had Nuclear power.
|
|
wakiwi
Leading Aircraftman
Posts: 8 
|
Post by wakiwi on Jan 17, 2015 12:54:26 GMT 12
the orion idea sounds good, load it up with dummy torpedos , do a couple of passes with doors open, then let one drop out.....
|
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jan 17, 2015 13:25:55 GMT 12
I think the problem may be that death is not easily repaired.
Indeed even an injury in such a remote area would be an issue that has the potential to cost much time and money.
Those fishing boats will be getting sorted, they have some major fraud and piracy issues on their hands at the moment. The Captains of the fishing boats would not be too concerned about the welfare of some of the crew, any rescue operation would soon become the realm of the NZ and Oz taxpayers. The Navy have had their fun, and as a Taxpayer I would be happy to save the fuel and ammo for another day.
Even if we boarded the boats, then what ?
We as a country could end up with 100 refugees to deal with. Sinking the boats may be a 'feel good' exercise but you don't need to be a maritime surveyor to see that they may be valueless and easily replaced.
Save the fuel, ammo and the refugee (repatriation) expenses.
Spend the money on the politicians, they are on the payroll anyway, and have it so the pirates don't return. They may even procrastinate long enough for the other pirates (Greenpeace/Sea Shepherd) to get involved in the spat.
Even better, someone else's money getting burned up while we watch the entertainment on what used to be the 'News'.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on Jan 18, 2015 12:08:41 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jan 18, 2015 12:10:45 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Jan 18, 2015 15:37:58 GMT 12
Whilst I can understand the sensistivity of the issue, particularly being in international waters, unfortunately it isnt a good look. Project Protector was supposed to provide this sort of capability. Makes New Zealand look like muppets...
|
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jan 18, 2015 16:53:03 GMT 12
Whilst I can understand the sensistivity of the issue, particularly being in international waters, unfortunately it isnt a good look. Project Protector was supposed to provide this sort of capability. Makes New Zealand look like muppets... So what would have been your plan then? What, precisely, would you have them do that they couldn't do? |
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jan 18, 2015 17:32:04 GMT 12
The very last thing we need is 3 foreign fishing boats tied up to the wharf and with 90% of the crews claiming they are stateless, no passports, and wanting to remain in NZ. That is no doubt what Mr Goff would have ended up with and somehow that proves the RNZN has things under control !
Those boats were more Australia's problem than ours, - but somehow I very much doubt the Aussies would be happy to take the crews off our hands.
It had the potential to be a very messy situation.
I believe Interpol have a purple notice out on the boats and the very last thing we need is them to steam into NZ waters to surrender.
The NZ Navy has gained the evidence required and probably had a successful mission.
Unfortunately this story has a few more chapters to it yet.
Illegal fishing is nothing new, places like Kiribati have zero chance of keeping it under control in their region. Somehow I think the International community is about to discover much more pressing issues and I think there is a very good chance that the NZDF is about to be about to be committed to another unrelated but even more unpleasant role.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Jan 18, 2015 17:49:32 GMT 12
I can understand the complexities, but I am concerned that despite the Southern Ocean Fisheries patrol being a key design criteria for a Protector OPV, a couple of dilapidated floating hulks can out manouver it in an environment that it was supposed to excel in. The fact that apparently it cant embark a helicopter in those conditions also limits its effectiveness - Did we buy the right boats? I'm not criticising the decisions made by the crew - they were on the spot, we're not. But regardless of what actually went on, it doesnt make the Navy look particularly effective...
|
|
Feeling a tad sheepish.
