Doug Pine, master of the 187gt Majestic Blue until earlier this month, will also allege that some of those under his command engaged in punishment beatings of the racially divided crew and disregarded the official waste management plan.
Coverage is available on Doug's Blog, from his attorney, and of course from the Bitter End.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Friday, October 16, 2009
NOAA Extends Comment Period on New Orca Protection Regulations
Comment Period Extension: NOAA has extended the deadline for submitting comments on proposed vessels regulation to protect killer whales in Puget Sound to Jan. 15, 2010.
We recognize that by extending the public comment period, we won’t have enough time to issue a final rule before the 2010 summer boating season. We continue to believe that it’s important to address the adverse effects of vessel traffic on killer whales in the near future. In light of the requests we’ve received for an extension of the comment period, however, we believe additional public outreach will enhance both NOAA Fisheries’ understanding of public concerns and the public’s understanding of the basis for our proposal. This will also allow time for cooperative efforts to refine the proposal. We’ll work toward adoption of a final rule before the 2011 summer boating season.
We’ll consider all comments and information received during the comment period in preparing a final rule.
See the Federal Register notice, below, for more information; or contact Lynne Barre, 206-526–4745. Scroll down the page to see the proposed rule and associated documents.
Hat tip to:Bitter End
We recognize that by extending the public comment period, we won’t have enough time to issue a final rule before the 2010 summer boating season. We continue to believe that it’s important to address the adverse effects of vessel traffic on killer whales in the near future. In light of the requests we’ve received for an extension of the comment period, however, we believe additional public outreach will enhance both NOAA Fisheries’ understanding of public concerns and the public’s understanding of the basis for our proposal. This will also allow time for cooperative efforts to refine the proposal. We’ll work toward adoption of a final rule before the 2011 summer boating season.
We’ll consider all comments and information received during the comment period in preparing a final rule.
See the Federal Register notice, below, for more information; or contact Lynne Barre, 206-526–4745. Scroll down the page to see the proposed rule and associated documents.
Hat tip to:Bitter End
Monday, October 12, 2009
Constitutional Challenge to Jones Act Shipping Provisions
It's out of Hawaii, so of course Hawaii Ocean Law has the scoop.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Salish Sea Name, one step closer to reality
From Bitter End
The SALISH SEA extends from the north end of the Strait of Georgia and Desolation Sound to the west end of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and south to the southern extent of the Puget Sound including the inland marine waters of southern British Columbia, Canada and northern Washington, USA. The name Salish Sea is not a historical term for the inland waters of British Columbia and Washington State. It was proposed by marine biologist Bert Webber in 1988. Dr. Webber recognized the need for a single geographic term that encompassed the entire ecosystem, spanning across the international border.
The SALISH SEA extends from the north end of the Strait of Georgia and Desolation Sound to the west end of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and south to the southern extent of the Puget Sound including the inland marine waters of southern British Columbia, Canada and northern Washington, USA. The name Salish Sea is not a historical term for the inland waters of British Columbia and Washington State. It was proposed by marine biologist Bert Webber in 1988. Dr. Webber recognized the need for a single geographic term that encompassed the entire ecosystem, spanning across the international border.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
BDI Jumps 4.3%
Showing it's biggest increase in more than two months, the Baltic Dry Index jumped 4.3% yesterday. Some are predicting big gains in the BDI before the end of the year, but I remain skeptical.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Somali Pirates Mistake La Somme for Cargo Ship: Later Regret Error
From AFP: Somali pirates attempted to storm the French navy's 18,000 tonne flagship in the Indian Ocean after mistaking it for a cargo vessel, the French military said on Wednesday. Five pirates were captured and are now presumably enjoying La Somme's brig.
La Somme is a Durance Class Command Tanker, with a complement of 159 men and armed with 1 40mm, 12 12.7mm, and 1 Simbad Mistral missile launcher.
La Somme is a Durance Class Command Tanker, with a complement of 159 men and armed with 1 40mm, 12 12.7mm, and 1 Simbad Mistral missile launcher.
DOHSA and the Doctrine of forum non conveniens
Does the Death on the High Seas Act (DOHSA) preclude dismissal on the basis of forum non conveniens? In Loya v. Starwood Hotels & Resorts the 9th Circuit examined just this issue.
Gillian Loya's husband, Ricardo, died in a scuba diving accident off the Mexican coast where he was vacationing at the Westin Resort & Spa Los Cabos in San Jose del Cabo, Baja California Sur. Allegedly, the guide was underage by PADI standards (PADI certifies dive centers), abandoned Ricardo, and failed to rescue him. Loya, a Washington resident, filed an action against these entities and others in Washington state court for dereliction of duty that resulted in her husband's wrongful death. The complaint also asserted claims under the Washington Consumer Protection Act (WCPA) and the Washington Timeshare Act (WTA) for falsely advertising that the Westin Resort provided safe scuba diving activities. Starwood removed on the basis of diversity and admiralty jurisdiction. Loya then amended the complaint to charge Raintree with violating the WTA and WCPA by failing to consent to personal jurisdiction in Washington. When Loya sought partial summary judgment on her state law claims, Starwood cross-moved for dismissal on the ground of forum non conveniens. The district court denied Loya's motion but granted Starwood's. In doing so, the court rejected Loya's argument that the doctrine of forum non conveniens is inapplicable because DOHSA provides the exclusive remedy for American beneficiaries and mandates venue in a United States district court. Instead, relying on Pain, the court held that DOHSA actions are within the admiralty jurisdiction of the federal courts and, whether or not DOHSA applies to this action, the Act does not preclude forum non conveniens dismissal. The court then ruled that an adequate alternative forum was available. After considering private and public interest factors, it concluded that dismissal was appropriate for the main reasons that Baja California Sur, Mexico is a more convenient forum, and the nucleus of Loya's case is the place where the accident occurred.
The 9th Circuit agreed with the District Court concluding: We conclude that the Death on the High Seas Act, unlike the Jones Act, does not preclude dismissal on the basis of forum non conveniens. The district court found that Baja California Sur is an adequate alternative forum, reasonably balanced the public and private interest factors that inform a forum non conveniens determination, and concluded that Baja California Sur is a more convenient, thus appropriate, forum. Accordingly, it dismissed this action on grounds of forum non conveniens. In doing so, it did not clearly abuse its discretion.
Judge Kleinfeld, in strongly worded dissent, agreed that forum non conveniens applies to DOHSA, but argued given the facts of this case it was wrong to exclude an american plaintiff suing an American company from American courts.
Gillian Loya's husband, Ricardo, died in a scuba diving accident off the Mexican coast where he was vacationing at the Westin Resort & Spa Los Cabos in San Jose del Cabo, Baja California Sur. Allegedly, the guide was underage by PADI standards (PADI certifies dive centers), abandoned Ricardo, and failed to rescue him. Loya, a Washington resident, filed an action against these entities and others in Washington state court for dereliction of duty that resulted in her husband's wrongful death. The complaint also asserted claims under the Washington Consumer Protection Act (WCPA) and the Washington Timeshare Act (WTA) for falsely advertising that the Westin Resort provided safe scuba diving activities. Starwood removed on the basis of diversity and admiralty jurisdiction. Loya then amended the complaint to charge Raintree with violating the WTA and WCPA by failing to consent to personal jurisdiction in Washington. When Loya sought partial summary judgment on her state law claims, Starwood cross-moved for dismissal on the ground of forum non conveniens. The district court denied Loya's motion but granted Starwood's. In doing so, the court rejected Loya's argument that the doctrine of forum non conveniens is inapplicable because DOHSA provides the exclusive remedy for American beneficiaries and mandates venue in a United States district court. Instead, relying on Pain, the court held that DOHSA actions are within the admiralty jurisdiction of the federal courts and, whether or not DOHSA applies to this action, the Act does not preclude forum non conveniens dismissal. The court then ruled that an adequate alternative forum was available. After considering private and public interest factors, it concluded that dismissal was appropriate for the main reasons that Baja California Sur, Mexico is a more convenient forum, and the nucleus of Loya's case is the place where the accident occurred.
The 9th Circuit agreed with the District Court concluding: We conclude that the Death on the High Seas Act, unlike the Jones Act, does not preclude dismissal on the basis of forum non conveniens. The district court found that Baja California Sur is an adequate alternative forum, reasonably balanced the public and private interest factors that inform a forum non conveniens determination, and concluded that Baja California Sur is a more convenient, thus appropriate, forum. Accordingly, it dismissed this action on grounds of forum non conveniens. In doing so, it did not clearly abuse its discretion.
Judge Kleinfeld, in strongly worded dissent, agreed that forum non conveniens applies to DOHSA, but argued given the facts of this case it was wrong to exclude an american plaintiff suing an American company from American courts.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
