Humpback Whales Come Dangerously Close To People At Santa Cruz Shore

SANTA CRUZ (CBS SF) – As many as 11 humpback whales have been feeding unusually close to the Santa Cruz shoreline, and there’s concern that interested boaters, kayakers and surfers are getting too close.

Wednesday marks a second day of increased enforcement near the boardwalk to protect the whales – each measuring about the length of a school bus – and the people in the water.  The U.S. Coast Guard has warned people to stay at least 100 yards away from the encroaching whales or face fines for whale harassment of at least $2,500.

Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Superintendent Paul Michel said that the humpbacks are close to shore because that’s where the krill and other small fish like anchovies are this time of year, but their close proximity combined with some very nice weather are drawing lots of waterborne spectator activity too.

KCBS’ Anna Duckworth Reports:

“We’ve seen anywhere from 75 to 100 people out there on the water close to these whales,” said Michel.

The Marine Sanctuary said no one has been hurt so far, but a sailboat was damaged this week when it struck a whale. Michel said that some kayaks have been overturned by the breaching whales. They’ve even caught some people trying to touch the humpbacks.

“Remember, these whales have to eat a lot of food to stay warm and healthy, and if we interrupt their feeding behavior then we damage those whales and keep them from being healthy animals,” said Michel.

Michel said that harbor patrol and fish and game officers will be keeping people away from the whales until they move on.

One woman got a major scare while filming the humpbacks, and posted the incredible video to YouTube. The video shows a female surfer floating on her board when two whales pop out of the water, mouths wide open, as they feed on a school of anchovies. The surfer nearly wound up being on the menu, but fortunately was just far enough away to avoid being touched by the whales.

(Copyright 2011 by CBS San Francisco. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)

More from Anna Duckworth
Comments

One Comment

  1. freda says:

    i dont think you phrased this correctly.. The whales are not swimming too close to the people.. the people are getting to close to the whales.It’s their element.

    1. billy g says:

      tell that to a surfer!

    2. Timmay says:

      NUKE THE WHALES

      1. Mike M. says:

        Gotta nuke something…

  2. will says:

    the headline should read the opposite

  3. gen says:

    I agree with Will and Freda. This is shoddy reporting that tries to frame the whales as dangerous to people. Ridiculous title. They are only ‘dangerous’ to silly people who try to get too close. I think the reporter is trying to bank on the incidence with the great white shark in Monterrey– riding the ‘animals-attacking-humans’ theme.

  4. Zsa Zsa says:

    Idiotic people can’t stay away from nature and then cry foul when something happens to them…poor humpbacks who have to look at these idiots. Hope the humpbacks are safe!

  5. Guapi says:

    “Remember, these whales have to eat a lot of food to stay warm and healthy, and if we interrupt their feeding behavior then we damage those whales and keep them from being healthy animals,” said Michel.

    “Remember, these people have to de-stress at the beach to stay healthy, and if we interrupt their relaxation then we damage those people and keep them from being healthy citizens.” Says Guapi

    1. jnsesq says:

      LOL. Big thumbs up, Guap!

    2. Yirmin Snipe says:

      Amen… if a human doesn’t de-stress properly they don’t die… they just go postal and kill fellow employees in a hail of bullets…

  6. Carl Curmudgeon says:

    Give it a rest.

    She may not have been 100 yards from the whales, but she was at least 100 feet or more away from being swallowed.

    Talk about sensationalistic journalism…

    1. The LBT says:

      My thoughts exactly! I was expecting to see her board upended and having to bail and swim away. That notwithstanding, I guess the reporter wasnt paying attention in biology class and completely forgot about the bahleen (sp?) filters in the whales mouths. The only way these filter-feeders could have eaten that surfer is if she was osertized in the blender first.

      1. Marbran says:

        Not so. A whale’s mouth is quite open and a whale can certainly swallow a whole person, but it’s not likely to. The baleen is around the perimeter of the upper mouth only, and traps food as the whale expels the water with its tongue. Anyone caught in a whale’s mouth would likely be crushed by the tongue during the water expulsion. Once the whale realizes that there is something pretty big in its mouth, it would probably spit it out. They can’t chew, you know.

      2. Geewiz says:

        The story is referring to the woman who is FILMING as being almost eaten…you guys think the camera was floating on a buoy???

      3. The LBT says:

        Both the surfer girl AND camera person are well out of immediate harms’ way, so it’s still a prime example of sensationalistic journalism.

        “When Whales attack! Blood in the Santa Cruz Harborrrrr of TERROR… Story at 7”

  7. TeddyTed says:

    Barb Roettger is a lot closer to the whales than the ‘unsuspecting surfer.’

  8. Bill Smith says:

    The Prince of Whales is an environmentalist. How come he doesn’t get involved?

    1. Pogue Mahone says:

      Because it’s Wales, not Whales, silly American, just like it’s not Scotch, it’s Scottish!

  9. Bob Jones says:

    hahaha Yea, surfer…. looks like the water is right for water skiing… NOT surfing

  10. baconknightt says:

    Environmentalist that think if they get close to nature they’ll feel “in tune” with them. NOT realizing THOSE ARE WILD ANIMALS. If you get in their way, they feel threatened.
    Much like the man in “GRIZZLY BEAR DIARIES”, you get too close to wild animals, you personify them, they’ll eat you. WE’RE PART OF THE FOOD CHAIN, same as they are. STRONGEST survive. And she was on a surf board.
    DARWIN AWARD WINNER

  11. Pa Deuce says:

    “Remember, these people have to de-stress at the beach to stay healthy, and if we interrupt their relaxation then we damage those people and keep them from being healthy citizens.”

    People, my foot. These are Democrats. They ae stressed because they voted for Obama. The Democrats have wrecked the economy, and, yes, that is stressful. But do not tke it out on the whales.

    1. James says:

      Uh no, Bush wrecked the economy when he gave it away to the top 1%. Remember, all the tax breaks for his cronies, all the bank corruption and collapses? He did that. Everyone knew when Obama was elected that it would take decades to repair. So if you don’t have any money, repug, blame your guy Bush.

      And whales are where they are supposed to be, doing what they are supposed to. Silly journalism, everyone was fine.

      1. Mikey says:

        Put the bong down and back away, James.

      2. SMS says:

        You’re an idiot James…do you really think one person could do everything the 1% to 99% b.s claims. Besides, if Bush is as stupid as all you lefties claim he couldn’t have done the damage you claim anyway. Banks, corruption, filthy politicians, financial collapses, etc. have been been around or have been happening for for decades. Maybe if you payed attention in school you would know this. Again James, you are an idiot!

      3. Jack von Bauer says:

        GARBAGE JIMBO…

        Investors Business Daily dug into Census Bureau numbers and came up with some interesting statistical facts related to Obama’s recent complaint that income inequality between the middle-class and the wealthy has increased over the past three decades.

        It has.

        It increased most during the Clinton presidency, with the middle-class suffering the loss while the wealthiest saw their income increase by 45% …

        And it DECLINED under George W. Bush … and has iINCREASED again — to the benefit of the wealthiest — UNDER THE OBAMA REGIME

      4. The LBT says:

        Ugh, and I guess Carter’s community reinvestment act which forced the banks to offer loans to people who could not possibly pay them doesnt factor in at all right? Nor Clinton using the DOJ to threaten bank officers with Felony charges and personal fines for the same reason was totally innocent as well? How about “Personal Responsibilty?” Gee, I guess I should be honest to the loan officer when he asks me how much I make because heck, I sure would hate to get a loan that’s way over my income level and end up bankrupt.

        Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
        NY TImes, By STEVEN A. HOLMES
        Published: September 30, 1999
        In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

        The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets — including the New York metropolitan region — will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

        Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

        In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates — anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

        Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
        By STEVEN A. HOLMES
        Published: September 30, 1999Sign In to E-Mail

        Print

        Single-Page

        In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

        The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets — including the New York metropolitan region — will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

        Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

        In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates — anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

        ”Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990’s by reducing down payment requirements,” said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae’s chairman and chief executive officer. ”Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.”

        Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.

        In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980’s.

        ”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”

        Under Fannie Mae’s pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 — a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

        Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

        Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
        Published: September 30, 1999(Page 2 of 2)Sign In to E-Mail

        Print

        Single-Page

        ”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”

        Under Fannie Mae’s pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 — a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

        Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

        Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.

        Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990’s. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.

        In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per cent.

        Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.

        In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.

        The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.

      5. James says:

        Excuse me, I apologize, you are right. Bush was way too stupid, verging on brain damaged, to pull it all off by himself. He was the mouthpiece run by Cheney and his band of merry criminals. They were responsible for siphoning off as much of the wealth of the country to themselves and their friends as they could manage through Haliburton, banks, etc. Of course he got to strut around and pretend, wreck havoc through misdirected wars, Katrina, etc. The government employees in Washington were leaving in droves, the positions not even filled, because everything he and the Republicans touched turned to ruin. But you don’t care, you just want to WIN, like it’s a football game, re-establish the aristocracy firmly with your feet on the necks of the rest of the people. You will say or do ANYTHING to gain as much control as you can, to siphon off as much as you can, to bring down Obama. The founding fathers roll in their graves. Nixon would be a vast improvement over the destructive, narcissistic, greedy, power-hungry repugs currently in office. Eisenhower would be ashamed, or a democrat. So, print out reams of falsehoods, it doesn’t matter, anyone with an ounce of common sense can see what has happened. There will always be those who would exploit the many hardworking people for the benefit of the few aristocrats, and they will be arrogantly proud of it. So may you get what you deserve, and if you are in trouble financially, thank the Republicans, the proud defenders of the very, very few and the manipulators of the ignorant.

        Great whale video!

    2. James Angryjew says:

      Pa, congratulations on being the first sub-intellectual party member to turn an already ridiculous article into a political attack! Now all we need is someone from the other party to jump in and explain why their party is NOT the party of sharks and we can have a battle of the myopic!

      1. LBT says:

        Jimmy- glad to see the Ivory Tower of Statist Idealism is as a open and accepting as ever. Keep at it, Markist.

        “SAUL ALINKSY’S RULES FOR RADICALS #12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)”

  12. Billy Bob Clinton says:

    The bikini-clad boarder did look quite delectable – signed Bill Clinton

    1. swissik says:

      BBClinton, I thought the same thing, quite a tasty morsel. To all the vitriolic comments I say that I know Santa Cruz and its people very well, and if anybody is worried about the whales there is no reason to be. It is the tourists that are the problem, not the locals.

  13. Hockey says:

    Oh come on the whale wasn’t even close to her

    1. Geewiz says:

      The story is referring to the person FILMING!!!! I’d say within 15-20′!!! Poorly written story

  14. Ed Stark says:

    They aren’t dangerous at all. Those whales live in the water, they know a little something about not swallowing idiotic sightseers. As to the comment in the article about ‘interrupting feeding’ that’s pretty stupid as well. If the whales have a problem with people, they just leave.

    I know some people might not know this, but the oceans are big. Really big. I’d quantify it for them but I’m afraid we must take expository baby steps here.

  15. Allan McConnell says:

    Is whale good with grits?

    1. Rock says:

      Oom gah wah! Whale taste like CHICKEN! Chicken good with grits! WHALE good with grits! ANYTHING good with grits!

  16. TroyG says:

    What are the odds of having that many stupid folks in frame at the same time, as well as a stupid person behind the camera?
    Oh, wait, it is California.

    As to the idiot who commented on interrupting the Whales feeding might adversely affect them….just one more example of how stupid people can be about animals. Do you get an adverse affect when someone interrupts your dinner, breakfast, or lunch? No?
    Neither do the whales dummy!

  17. Jonah says:

    She’s cute. If I were a whale, I’d try to eat her, too.

  18. Kulose says:

    The birds are bothering the whales too. Will they also be fined?

  19. max says:

    Kill the Whales.

  20. Jacques Cousteau says:

    what about those FN birds!? the coast guard should tell them they’re gonna kick them off the beach if they don’t stop it. maybe they’ll ticket them, it is kalifornia. on second thought, kalifornia should pass a bill heavily regulating the whales. it is a good visual example of the 1% v 99% argument. occupy monterey bay! FN fat whales, eatin up all the krill and anchovies, not leavin any for the oppressed birds.

  21. The Big Lewinski says:

    I am not a whale but I would like to eat her.

  22. Mark says:

    Looks like the whale has good taste. She is an attractive gal.

  23. The Dude says:

    Idiotic news reporting by people who probably don’t know how to swim and have never even been in the Pacific Ocean. The girt on the surboard and the kayaker are way outside the surf break south of the pier in the whale’s feeding area just to be be close to them. Also, that girl is out of her mind paddling out there without a wetsuit. That water is no more than about 60 degrees. The whales are doing what they always do and the people are in no danger. And yet the reports make is sound like the whales are doing something new and dangerous. Stupid!

  24. Dan says:

    I hope they are carrying match’s so they can light a fire after they are swallowed.

  25. juan valdez says:

    Time to open up Humpback season.
    California could sell whale tags for $100,000 per whale. That would bring in some revenue that is leaving due to the Communists’ agenda.

  26. YouDude60 says:

    Think: If a whales die by human touch, then whales have a problem.
    Notice: The whale chose not to eat the human/kayak combo meal.
    Believe: If the kayaker was eaten, its just desserts.

    Stop coddling People AND whales, you over-involved ninnies. Live and let live and find something more worthwhile to live for than the breathless exasperation on behalf of an animal far more capable than you’ll ever be.

  27. SMS says:

    my momma always told me…”stupid is as stupid does”

  28. Harpoon'em says:

    I wish we could hunt whales. I hear their meat is delicious. One time while off shore we shot some dolphins with a 12ga. Their meat wasn’t all that great. I think they had been feeding on herring and they tasted like it. Whale is supposed to be beefy like a steak and the tenderloin is supple and lean like a filet minon. Well, now I’m hungry.

    1. Scott McVittie says:

      Like to shoot whales do you? Then you’ll really salivate over Farley Mowat’s “A Whale For The Killing.” Read the book, moron, then maybe you’ll rethink your food source.
      Speaking of food sources, there are only two kinds or types of Cetaceans in existence: The toothed whales of which the sperm and killer whales and are meat eaters while the bayleen whales which feed on plankton and other very small animals do not have teeth, rather finger-like filters. BTW, baleen whales cannot open their mouths very wife so it is doubtful that a human being could be swallowed by one as this story “warns.”

      1. Millie White says:

        FYI
        “killer whales” ARE NOT whales.
        They are dolphins.

  29. Jack von Bauer says:

    Let’s get this straight… an organ of the state, the COAST GUARD, is going to “fine” citizens swimming, surfing or boating in OPEN WATER because THEY SAY “people” are too close to a creature bigger than a frackin’ BUS.

    A creature that spends most of its time HIDDEN FROM VIEW under water.

    Hey, I like whales as much as the next guy… but it seems the descent into brazen BIG GOVERNMENT totalitarianism continues.

    1. Millie White says:

      They are protected by law – what’s your problem?

  30. Chicago Nick says:

    We are in biblical times I guess…

  31. Steve says:

    Nuke a gay whale for Jesus!

  32. robert g says:

    “Remember, these whales have to eat a lot of food to stay warm and healthy, and if we interrupt their feeding behavior then we damage those whales and keep them from being healthy animals,” said Michel.

    Oh come on. Those whale are not going to stop eating because of a person on a surf board. It’s crazy remarks like that , that have ruined the credibility of environmentalist and animal rights groups

  33. Sick of Libs says:

    I believe it to be possible that you could actually shove this whale up the bung of most liberals in Cali sideways due to the constant stretching and talking that gets spewed out of their behinds on a daily basis. Thats one way to keep the whales warm, Happy not so sure but they would be able to feed quite well, especially if it were shoved up say Michael Moores backside.

  34. kmo says:

    Yum, warm and squishy on the outside, crunchy on the inside!

  35. Millie White says:

    I guess someone will have to get killed before these idiots stop getting dangerously close to the whales.

  36. TexasForever says:

    Hey, what’s the harm.
    If a whale eats a stupid Californian then its one less vote for Obama.
    Its a win-win.
    Whale gets fed and people of America survives this Marxist takeover by Obama and his Democratic allies.

    1. Jill says:

      Oh yuck, Texas, home of the grossly polluted, child-abusing, executin’, dumb as a bag of hammers right-wingers.

  37. Aj says:

    WRONG ANSWER! Whales know we are there! It is “OUR” element. Also, more BS drama from the media because; WHALES THROATS AREN’T BIG ENUFF!

  38. JOe Dutra says:

    Correction – That is not a surfer. That is a paddle-boarder.

    The whale never came close.

    Anna, continue your struggle to find relevant news.

  39. CZ says:

    That did not look close at all. What is wrong with people, America is so ridiculously sissified it is unreal. Man Ameicants are a bunch of overreacting cry baby wimps. The wale is fine so is the chick, this is not even a story.

  40. Louie, louie says:

    Moral: If you’re a hot chick, stay away from sperm whales.

  41. Dave from Bay says:

    Does anyone think it’s odd that she isn’t wearing a wetsuit? I surf in these areas, and she is way under dressed. Wetsuits are practically mandatory to be comfortable in the water

  42. Consultofactus says:

    Okay – this fits one of my favorite jokes….3 old men are sitting on a bench discussing reincarnation. The first old man says – when I come back I want to be a prize bull, that way I could have my way with hundreds of sweet young heffers. The second old man interjected “What are you nuts? As soon as you get awarded a blue ribbon they’ll sell your sperm and send you to the slaughter house! No for me, I’m coming back as a prize stallion that way I could sire an entire herd!” The third old man says “Nuts to that, if you break your leg, they’ll shoot you!” So the two old men ask the third…”OK wise guy, you don’t want to be a bull, you don’t want to be a stallion what do YOU want to come back as???” The third old man says “A whale.” The other two gasped “A whale???” The third old man confidently said “yeah, where else are you going to get a nine foot tongue and a hole in the top of your head to breath!!”

  43. defecating_heroes says:

    This really is the Tournament of Fairies. The other day a “guy” outsurfed by a little fish with a big fin, now somebody terrified by plankton-feeding Moby D*ck. If humans were meant to be aquatic, they’d have fins. And those meant to come out of the closet, would be little mermaids.

  44. jerrystr says:

    Whale wasn’t really that close. A lot of hype over nothing.

  45. DyePinkLiberalDye says:

    Save a whale. Feed it a liberal.

  46. randy says:

    Reporter “Anna Duckworth” has it backwards:

    PEOPLE are swimming dangerously close to the whales, not the other way around. Author: Please correct your title.

  47. reynaldo says:

    Those whales are obviously terrorists. DESTROY THEM DHS!

  48. george says:

    Talk about harassment, did anyone notice the seagulls?

  49. COSteve says:

    Why are people blaming the writer? Drudge is the one who changed the headline to suggest a surfer almost got eaten.

  50. offended says:

    Whale harrasment? WHALE HARRASMENT? As Dirty Harry would say= “Well I’m all broken up over that whales rights.”

  51. dontrenigin12 says:

    you havent lived till you tasted a whale steak,,,,,UNREAL…

  52. Fernando1958 says:

    correct headline should be:
    People Come Dangerously Close to Humpback Whales At Santa Cruz Shore

    people! get out of the water!

  53. Randy Phillips says:

    Not ot get too political, but in Oct. 2010, Greenpeace, which was founded to save whales, stayed real quiet when the Obama administration agreed with Japah to allow more whales to be killed.

    Obama has tight control of the Sierra Club and other environmental groups.Let’s hope Obama comes round to protecting Whales from tourists instead of protecting Jpan from Greenpeace.

  54. Jaxonsd says:

    I blame Captian Kirk for stealing it’s mate and taking it to the future.

  55. Elvis says:

    Stupid humans and liberals are the down fall of planet Earth.

    1. Guapi says:

      Same difference….

  56. Roger Andrews says:

    “Remember, these whales have to eat a lot of food to stay warm and healthy, and if we interrupt their feeding behavior then we damage those whales and keep them from being healthy animals,” said Michel.

    This is why the rest of the country think people in California have lost all their common sense. It would be one thing if people were out in long boats trying to harpoon the whales. Then we would be disturbing them. My common sense tells me that if whales were being disturbed from the observers they would probably just “swim away” maybe? I think they have that capability. And since I’ve been told since I was a small child that whales and dolphins are smarter than us, I assume they would have enough sense (more than Californians) to do this. I also imagine they would have enough sense not to swallow a human. Red meat is so gauche.

  57. La Suarez says:

    With regard to swimming, this means reviews of the most useful swimming paddles, moist suits along with other products ; regarding riding a bike, it is all about the actual bikes and also the racing clothes ; while for operating,…swim equipment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More From CBS San Francisco

Get The New CBS SF Bay Area Local App
Got Our Weather App?

Listen Live