Whales vs. ships
Charleston's harbor pilots say requirement to cut speed would be almost punitive
The Post and Courier
Capt. David Ernst, of the harbor pilot boat Fort Sumter, follows the Friendly Seas, a bulk cargo freighter, out to the Atlantic Ocean from Charleston Harbor on Thursday.
The Post and Courier
The harbor pilot boat Fort Moultrie sits at the harbor pilots' pier Tuesday.
The Post and Courier
Video
Charleston Harbor Pilots
Charleston Harbor pilot boats are forced to slow down under a new federal rule that slows down ships coming in and out of port, to protect the rare right whale. The pilots say the rule isn't safe or fair.
Additional stories
Ships may have to slow down, published 08/27/08 (has links to other previous stories)
The seas are up and roiling, pitching the harbor pilot boat sideways as it motors in the wake of a huge bulk transport ship.
The swells look like the humps of whales.
All you can see through the port window of the 75-foot-long pilot boat is the steel flank of the mammoth 200-yard-long ship. But the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is about to force the smaller boat, and the ship, to slow down during the winter to protect the nearly extinct right whale.
The right whale is a legend 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.
The whales summer in food-rich waters off New England and calve in warm winter waters off the Southeast near Florida. Nearly 40 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.
Ship strikes are considered one of the leading causes of right whale deaths.
NOAA is expected to rule in early October that ships longer
than 65 feet must slow down to 10 knots (11 1/2 mph) within 23 miles of the coastline along the whales' migration route. 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.
"Studies have shown whales are oblivious to passing vessels," said Jackie Savitz, senior scientist for Oceana, an environmental advocate. "They don't go the right way or get out of the way fast enough. They can't stop when they're surfacing because they become buoyant to surface." Slowing down is not that costly to shipping, she said. "A lot of the time vessels adjust their times to get in and out of port anyway."
The Charleston ports community roundly opposes the rule. Charleston harbor pilots, though, consider it almost punitive.
Their boats would be the only ones on the East Coast forced to slow down, pilots said; they're longer than others because they ride as far as 15 miles out from the jetties at the harbor mouth in big seas to drop off and pick up pilots on ladders swinging from the hulls of the ships. They're seeking a waiver to be excluded from the rule.
"I've been going out of here on a pilot boat to the (15 miles out) sea buoys and back since 1969," said Bill Elliott, the pilot steering the bulk transport ship out of harbor, before he scrambled up a rocking rope ladder to the big ship. "You used to see one right whale every two or three years. I probably see five or six a year now."
But there's never been a reported whale strike in the shipping channel into Charleston, he and others said. 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. None were in Charleston. The pilots think the precautions already in place, such as alerting ships to nearby whales, are enough.
The measures in place have been successful for 34 years," said John Cameron, a former U.S. Coast Guard station commander who is a staff consultant for the pilots.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly version
Comments
PalmettoDP (anonymous) says...
I could almost believe this story was published as a joke, but unfortunately, it wasn't.
September 17, 2008 at 1:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DoaMM (anonymous) says...
Can't they just put a fish finder on the ship? Bass fishermen have at least three per boat they own these days.
They got satellite, GPS tracking, radar, sonar, probably underwater cameras but they can't afford a $150.00 Bass Master fish finder?!
September 17, 2008 at 7:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bearsfan88 (anonymous) says...
This article about ship traffic in the news section and another article is in the business section stating that Chas. port is down. Traffic is up but port is down??? If we are down and Sav. up than i would think Sav should have more traffic thus more whale encounters. I guess the whales like visiting the Chas. area because of our great restaurants and shopping.
September 17, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DoaMM (anonymous) says...
CB, you're busting my groove, man! And you're wrong...whales can't be mammals. When the last time you saw boobies on a whale? Even then, the bra size would be astounding!
:)
September 17, 2008 at 7:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ironhorse (anonymous) says...
Bertdogg,
Apparently the whales get learn how to cross traffic by watching the Ashley Phosphate illegals.
September 17, 2008 at 8:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DoaMM (anonymous) says...
spankerbuns wrote:
"The pilot and ship operator will be slightly inconvenienced by not being able to watch TV..."
Yeah, but they can play cards or throw the dice around a little, right?
:)
September 17, 2008 at 8:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
majorjohnson (anonymous) says...
These people who put animals ahead of people are sick, like the people who are all for regulation on industry because they think someone is overpaid, like it's punishment they deserve. As soon as someone says something about someone being paid too much, I know I'm talking with a stone cold idiot, probably a socialist democrat.
You people deserve some punishment, like four years of Obama. Problem is I would have to be punished along with you.
September 17, 2008 at 8:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ironhorse (anonymous) says...
Early,
Good point. You need speed (way on) to maneuver above sea state 3.
The Titanic hit an iceberg because she was slowing down (actually attempting to back down). If the ship had maintained speed or better yet increased speed, could've gone around it no problem.
The ships will need speed to get around the whales.
September 17, 2008 at 8:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
postman01 (anonymous) says...
Animal Rights Fascism succinctly describes this.
September 17, 2008 at 8:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
tc1 (anonymous) says...
"The ships will need speed to get around the whales."
ironhose, I would guess that to be true. However I also don't see how there is any room for manuvering ships in the channel where the water is deep enough and it takes a long way to stop them. That is why they need the pilots with their intimate knowledge of exactly where the channel is every foot of the way in. I also don't see 10mph making any difference in the survival rate when hit. Might not die immeadiately (better?) but die they will.
September 17, 2008 at 9:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
iceman1978 (anonymous) says...
Maybe there's a device that they can place around the harbor that will keep the wales away? Kind of like a repellant.
September 17, 2008 at 9:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oneworld (anonymous) says...
you are right Thomas, the idea is that at 10 knot speed the strike impact is not great enough to cause damage but rather just pushes the animal out of the way. Ironhorse, the problem is that they cannot see these animals in the first place, and even if they could there is little room to move out of the channel to go around them anyway.
On another note, slowing down will reduce fuel consumption and the particulate matter pollution being released into the air by these ships. It's all about compromise majorjohnson, pay a little extra in your time to benefit another species and to better the air that you breath here in charleston. :)
September 17, 2008 at 9:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ironhorse (anonymous) says...
oneworld,
You can see the whales. Their breeding grounds are well known (and marked) and lookouts are posted when a ship transits those areas during breeding season.
September 17, 2008 at 10:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DoaMM (anonymous) says...
CB wrote:
"Me? I'd be making candles."
Now that's funny right there! Everyone needs a hurricane lamp or two...
September 17, 2008 at 10:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
nikkiP (anonymous) says...
I'm having a hard time taking the guy seriously when NOAA says there are 400 whales and he tries to say "Well... I just saw a bunch!"
I think it's a principle similar to trains. I had been told that when a train sees a car on the tracks, the conductor is told to speed up because it increases the chances the car will just be deflected as opposed to obliterated. Something about the train actually increasing energy, instead of decreasing energy which would just transfer to the car. I'm not sure, but something along those lines?
And they're not looking out for animals more than people. Slowing down in the harbor won't kill anyone.
September 17, 2008 at 10:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
tc1 (anonymous) says...
"In the end, this amounts to nothing but "feel good" legislation aimed at quieting lobbyist. It doesn't accomplish anything except to cost shipping companies money and therefore, in the end, cost us more money."
+1 for that.
September 17, 2008 at 10:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mkris (anonymous) says...
That was very funny, coldbeer!
September 17, 2008 at 11:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DoaMM (anonymous) says...
CB, I bow to your comedy genius-ness.
Bravo sir.
(PS - don't forget the tube tops...)
September 17, 2008 at 11:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
nikkiP (anonymous) says...
Aweful teeth, and five kids. And they only roam around at night, like a trip to walmart with your toddler and baby at 11pm is a family affair...
September 17, 2008 at 11:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SCHoser (anonymous) says...
I'm not saying that we should obliterate species on this planet, but what would happen if the right whales are gone? Have their not been thousands of species of fish, whale or shark that are extinct? Creatures on this planet have come and gone long before humans, and this cycle will continue long after. You can't have your cake and eat it to. People want the business here, but they also want a kinder, gentler sea lane. Not gonna happen. I dare say if we start to affect maritime shipping, and either costing the owners money or hurting their profit, that's what is going to become extinct.
September 17, 2008 at 1:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jeff61 (anonymous) says...
How many years have these ships been coming here and how many whales have been killed by them????
September 17, 2008 at 5:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
rollo (anonymous) says...
"Good! The sooner the better. The whales would be better off and so would the people.
If the port and those in the shipping industry don't care to get along with the people of Charleston let them leave. Take the business to jasper where it will end up anyway.
Our harbor is overrun with police in boats harassing local boaters to prevent "terrorism" of the port. If it is so dangerous and such a big terror target why don't they move it away from the population centers?"
Spanker, If the port wasn't here, there would be no population center here. Charleston has been a port since before it was a city. You need to do a little research before you start spouting off, otherwise you risk looking stupid.
September 17, 2008 at 8:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
rollo (anonymous) says...
scnative4ever;
Whales aren't fish, people're gonna' think you're stupid!
September 18, 2008 at 9:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com 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 postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" 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.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.