Posted on 06/13/2010 6:52:35 PM PDT by naturalman1975
THE United States' peak sailing body was so concerned about Abby Sunderland's solo record bid that it refused to sponsor her.
As the young sailor blasted her critics, the American Sailing Association confirmed it had knocked back the teenager's appeal for help, fearing commercial endorsement might encourage her to take too many risks.
"We chose not to be sponsors of Abigail because we did have concerns about the timing of her departure," said executive director Charlie Nobles.
Abby's route placed her in the treacherous Indian Ocean during the notoriously tough winter months.
"She had a lot of sponsors that were behind her and I think that puts pressure on her," Mr Nobles said. "We made a prudent decision not to contribute to that."
.....
Mrs Sunderland, who is pregnant with the family's eighth child, said the family did not have the money to compensate Australian rescue officials, with the rescue costing $300,000, the Courier Mail reported.
"The full cost of chartering an Airbus would be so high, you'd think they would have to work with the US Government for that," she said from her California home.
"We're not wealthy people," she said. "What price would you put on a child's life?"
....
Federal Transport Minister Anthony Albanese confirmed yesterday that the Government would not seek reimbursement for the cost of Abby's rescue.
"That is not the way that the law works," Mr Albanese told Channel 10's Meet the Press.
"If there was an Australian lost at sea, we would want the international laws on maritime to kick in and for every effort to be made to save that person."
A spokeswoman for the Australian Maritime Safety Authority said that Abby would likely be transferred to one of two other ships heading to the rescue site.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
Sad isn’t it.
Excellence isn’t what it used to be, even with “Conservatives”
Last I heard, it is still the parents’ responsibility.
Just as the cost of her rescue should be her parents’ responsibility, not yours and mine and the Australians.
Well, maybe when they air the reality show that was all set up before this adventure, they’ll be able to pay the bills.
Then that should have told the Sunderlands something right there. As well as Abby's sponsors.
She's not 46...she's not 36...she's not even 26....
By having 8 kids, they are making up for much of my family and friends that, in most cases, did not even bother to get married.
Then there are those who are responsible and don't have kids they can't afford...
...and are taxed to pay for those who are irresponsible.
Are you under the impression there are rescue services funded by Government patrolling those waters?
We aren't talking about the Coast Guard rescuing day sailors. We are talking about a part of the Ocean most people avoid because its too damn far from anywhere and its too damn rough for many serious Ocean going vessels let alone racing yachts.
If someone wants to try in a racing yacht more power too 'em they got major cajones to even try. But it took A french ship nearly 24 hours just to get to her location then they need to come back and that is AFTER they knew exactly where she was. The fuel alone for that trip is more than most people make in a month plus the cost of the crew. Then you have the cost of sending planes to locate her as well. Someone has to pay for it why should it not be the person who tempted fate?
Not patrolling, no - but monitoring them and responsible for rescues within them, yes, there are. For the particular stretch of water that Abby Sunderland was in, those organisations were the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, and Maritime RCC La Reunion.
I'm a retired officer of the Royal Australian Navy, who understands Australia's duties with regards to rescue in its maritime search and rescue region. Wild Eyes was within that region at the time Australia took over responsibility for the rescue of Abby Sunderland (at the time of the initial distress signal, she was just inside the region handled by Reunion Island, but they had already asked Australia for assistance). These duties are outlined in the Convention on International Civil Aviation, 1944; the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974; and the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, 1979.
We aren't talking about the Coast Guard rescuing day sailors. We are talking about a part of the Ocean most people avoid because its too damn far from anywhere and its too damn rough for many serious Ocean going vessels let alone racing yachts.
I'm aware of that. It doesn't change Australia's obligations or what Australia does to fulfill those obligations. It just makes it more complicated.
If someone wants to try in a racing yacht more power too 'em they got major cajones to even try. But it took A french ship nearly 24 hours just to get to her location then they need to come back and that is AFTER they knew exactly where she was. The fuel alone for that trip is more than most people make in a month plus the cost of the crew. Then you have the cost of sending planes to locate her as well. Someone has to pay for it why should it not be the person who tempted fate?
Because that's not how it works, and hasn't been for hundreds of years.
If that French fishing boat found itself in distress, it would expect everybody in a position to provide assistance to do so. That's what you do.
Mariners have a fundamental duty to render assistance to other mariners in distress.
That's where the hypocrisy of the Adventures in Sunderland fans is evident. They say it's so safe, but if that were the case, why was it so impossible to get insurance really cheaply?
Didn't say they didn't maybe you are misunderstaning. I am saying someone should pay for the costs associated with such. And if I am understanding the situation are they not asking for payment now?
The Australian government has made it quite clear it will not be asking for payment because that is not how the system works. As I’ve said.
This is a duty under the traditions of the sea and the laws of the sea. It is not appropriate to expect payment.
I have said in other threads that I believe it would be appropriate for the Sunderlands to make a donation to either the Australian Volunteer Coastguard, or the Société Nationale de Sauvetage en Mer, or some similar organisation. I would also certainly not object to the idea of them offering to reimburse some or all of the costs of the French fishing vessel. But it must not be expected. It must be their choice.
Sailors need to go to the aid of other sailors, whether expense is incurred or not. If that ever breaks down, it will cost life after life after life.
More power to ‘er.
I would have done this in a heartbeat at her age.
As it was, all we did was race snowmobiles at 60mph+ back in the early 70’s. That and A frame hydroplanes with way too much horsepower.
Pushing the edge is just fun. Being prepared and doing in safely is just part of the equation. Back in my day, nobody would pay us to do these things - we just did ‘em for the fun of it.
I take it such is paid for with Tax Money.
If so and we would get one of these record breaker attempts every month with the same results (lost at sea in those same waters) would they need more tax money to fund the search and rescue costs?
Would the Aussies be glad to cough up more tax money so these folks could keep rolling the dice on getting a reality show?
I'm betting not.
Yes, it is.
If so and we would get one of these record breaker attempts every month with the same results (lost at sea in those same waters) would they need more tax money to fund the search and rescue costs?
Yes, it would be. But we don't. We have to deal with this every few years. It is a recurring issue. It's one we are used to. It's a reality that Australia's location and relative isolation means we have a very large amount of sea to look after. We deal with that.
Would the Aussies be glad to cough up more tax money so these folks could keep rolling the dice on getting a reality show?
No - I think we would expect that American child welfare authorities deal with parents like that.
Wow! If I had children I'm sure they could not only drive they could spell and construct a simple sentence with correct grammar. lol
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.