2 Men Missing After Boat Sinks Off Coast of Alaskan Island
Samuel Shavings, 72, joined neighbors Albert Williams, 65, and Williams' 19-year-old son for a fishing trip on Monday, May 26
During their excursion, their boat sank off the coast of Western Alaska near Nunivak Island in the Bering Sea
Williams' son was able to swim safety, but his father and Shavings are still missingTwo men are still missing after the boat they were on sank off the coast of Western Alaska on Monday, May 26, according to an Alaska State Trooper (AST) news release.
Albert Williams, 65, and Samuel Shavings, 72, were on a 10-foot Ocean Pro boat with Williams' 19-year-old son near Mekoryuk, a town located on Nunivak Island in the Bering Sea. Mekoryuk is a village of about 300 people on Nunivak Island in Western Alaska, and is 550 miles west of Anchorage.
Around 9 p.m. local time, AST received a call that a boat sank in rough water conditions.
The 19-year-old swam to shore and was transported to a clinic for further evaluation and treatment. Initially, the AST reported that a second man had been recovered safely, per Alaska News Source. However, on Tuesday, May 27, AST "corrected" its previous report and confirmed that both men are still missing.
Williams' daughter, Dallas, told the outlet that her father and brother were out subsistence fishing with their neighbor, Shavings. 'They were looking — my dad hadn't gotten a seal yet this spring — so they went to go look for seals,' she explained. 'It's a seasonal thing every spring.'
She then explained how the boat sank. 'My brother says that [the sea] was getting really rough and they were taking water in from the motor side,' she said. 'And it just filled up with too much water.'
'We have a whole bunch of family coming over to be with my mom so that we're not alone,' Dallas said. 'A lot of people have been bringing food, so we haven't been alone at all since.'
The ASP reported that two local boats and the U.S. Coast Guard searched for the men from Monday night to Tuesday morning. Additionally, the Rescue Coordination Center planned to launch a C-130 plane on Tuesday morning.
Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories.
A representative for the Alaska State Troopers did not immediately respond to PEOPLE's request for more information on Wednesday.
Read the original article on People
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
She Moved Out. Now Her Former Roommate Wants Her to Pay for Electricity She Didn't Use
A woman was shocked after her former roommate requested that she pay part of the electric bill after she moved out The Reddit user said she found the situation "completely ridiculous" She stood her ground and refused to pay for the electricity that she did not useA woman seeks support from the Reddit community due to a heated dispute with her former roommate over an electricity bill. The poster, a 27-year-old, recently moved out of the apartment she shared with the woman she calls Patty, 25, and is now questioning whether she should pay for a portion of the bill after her departure. Before she moved out on April 25, the poster says they paid off the outstanding balance and transferred the utility account to Patty's name. The final bill, which covered the previous two months, was 'substantially higher than anything we paid before' due to Patty's increased heater use and her boyfriend's extended stay at their place. Despite being away for the entire month of March, the poster still split that month's bill evenly with Patty, highlighting her willingness to share costs even when she wasn't present, she states. The situation escalated when Patty reached out a week after the move, asking about the following power bill that included the last few days of April. 'I said that in the final bill we already paid for most of April and her next bill will only include April 26th-April 30th,' the poster explains, noting that Patty's boyfriend was visiting again during those last days of April and 'using the heater all day.' Patty then informed her that she would calculate what the poster owed for those five days based on the upcoming bill. 'I'm finding this completely ridiculous,' the poster admits, frustrated by the lack of clarity over how the charges would be determined and the possibility of paying for energy used by Patty's guests. After moving out, the poster says Patty hosted several other people in the apartment, and a new roommate moved in just a week after her departure. She points out, 'Whatever light they all spent will obviously add up there,' making it difficult to fairly divide the costs for those few days. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Adding to her frustration, the poster notes her generosity during their time as roommates. 'Mind you, I have gifted her a ton of stuff when I moved out and have also helped her with free resources for school,' she shares, also mentioning times she provided rides and covered the light bill when Patty was away for two months. Despite her past kindness, the poster is now being asked to pay for days she cannot accurately account for, including usage by Patty's boyfriend and other guests. 'Now she's going to charge me 5 days that she'll divide based on her next bill? PLUS I would be paying half for her boyfriend as well,' she writes, incredulous at the request. Ultimately, the poster is choosing to stand firm in her decision to refuse payment for those disputed days. Read the original article on People
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Veteran has 'burning fire' to correct pension 'robbery'
Time has not dimmed Ernest Williams' sense of injustice. Despite being 90 years of age, the former Royal Navy veteran says he still has a "burning fire" inside him. He believes he was "robbed" of the military pension he deserved and has been fighting to have it corrected since the 1980s. "I'm coming up to 91 and I haven't got long to go," Mr Williams said. "I'm doing it for my wife." It wasn't until Mr Williams had a chance conversation with his brother-in-law Ronald Oswell, that he says he realised what had happened. The two men had almost identical service records and both applied for redundancy when the UK armed forces looked to reduce numbers in 1969. But while Mr Williams, who lives in King's Stanley, Gloucestershire, was given a discharge date in 1970, his brother-in-law was allocated one in 1972. "He said 'What do you think of the pension, Ernie?'," Mr Williams told BBC West Investigations. "I said, 'Well £440 a year is not very good, is it?' "And he said 'No it's £880 a year'." It transpired that during the intervening two years, military pension rules had changed and had Mr Williams been given the later discharge date he would have got a much better pension. The Ministry of Defence said it cannot comment on individual cases, but during his time campaigning Mr Williams has been told that his pension reflected his "full and correct entitlement". Mr Williams enlisted in the navy aged 18 in 1952, eventually becoming a Chief Petty Officer. He served many years overseas, including on aircraft carriers in the far east. However, as the UK armed forces looked to reduce numbers, he was offered redundancy under a navy programme known as DCI 1187/68. The navy agreed to add time to his service record so that he received a military pension in addition to the state pension. But crucially, Mr Williams says he was not given a say in when he left the armed forces, and rather was told he would leave the navy on 28 November 1970. Others who applied at the same time were given a discharge date in 1972. "You're told when you're going. [Your discharge date] was not disclosed until some time later. There was nothing I could do about it," Mr Williams said. Mr Williams and his wife Wendy believe about 400 men were discharged in the same 'first wave' as him, with about 2,600 going in the 'second wave' in 1972, receiving a substantially improved pension. Mrs Williams said: "What did this 400 do that was so wrong they had to be discriminated against financially?" She added that the extra money would have made a "vast difference" to their lives. The couple launched a series of appeals to various official bodies once they realised what had happened. In May 1984, Mr Williams was told by the MOD that both his and his brother-in-law's pension "are correct" and the disparity was due to "a pay rise for CPO's [Chief Petty Officers] in the intervening two years which is reflected in the basic pension awarded". He continued to fight his case throughout the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s. In 1998, the Armed Forces Personnel Administration Agency told Mr Williams that in the period between the two phases, "changes were made [to the military pension] but these changes were not retrospective" and that his pension reflected his "full and correct entitlement". Over the years Mr Williams has been supported by some of Stroud's MPs. In 2019, Labour MP David Drew wrote to Penny Mordaunt, the Defence Secretary at the time, to highlight Mr Williams' case, believing he was the victim of "an injustice" and had been "unfairly treated". Mr Drew argued that comments made by senior politicians in the late 1960s about intended improvements to military pay meant that possible differences in pensions should have been foreseen. He describes Mr Williams' case as "shocking" and that "both the process and the documentation surrounding the volunteer redundancies were ethically flawed". But ultimately, Mr Williams received the same answer from everybody he asked to look at his case – that his pension was correct based on the rules at the time. Mr Williams still maintains that before he left, he never had the effect of different discharge dates explained to him – and that he would never have accepted redundancy on the earlier date had he known an extra two years would have effectively doubled his pension. Mr Williams' case has similarities to a fight waged by other military veterans over their pensions. Jim Monaghan was involved with the Equality for Veterans Association (EfVA) which also campaigned against pension decisions in the 1970s. Military rules before April 1975 meant that in most circumstances, servicemen had to serve 22 years to be eligible for an armed forces pension in addition to the state pension. Mr Monaghan left the RAF at the end of 1974, having accrued 14 years' service, including in Singapore and the middle east. Had he left a few months later, he would have received a military pension. The rule change in 1975, like rules on pensions generally, were not retrospective. The issue was debated in parliament in 2015, with then-Defence Minister Anna Soubry saying making changes to pension policy retrospective would break an "essential principle" and "would lead to widespread, long-term and unmanageable consequences for both this government and future governments". Mr Monaghan believes communication from the MOD was not good enough. "Everyone was kept in the dark," he said. "They knew nothing about [pensions] when they were young. "We never had a brief on pensions. We were never given any insight and probably we didn't have any interest because I was a young man." The Equalities for Veterans Association was disbanded a few years ago – because of a lack of success and the dwindling number of surviving veterans from that period. Mr Williams says he feels "very bitter" about his experience but hopes that by speaking out publicly for the first time, he can bring more attention to his case. He also hopes any other servicemen still alive and affected by the same issue will come forward. He added he intends to continue his campaign by contacting the current Stroud MP, Labour's Simon Opher, in the hope he will take up the case. Mr Williams said: "I'm just a stubborn old sod and I'm not going to give in. I would appreciate it if anybody said to me 'you were right and we were wrong'." Follow BBC West on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to: or via WhatsApp on 0800 313 4630. WW2 veteran 'heartbroken' after meeting minister Gurkha veterans threaten renewed hunger strike Compensation process broken, says RAF veteran War widows who lost pensions to receive compensation Ministry of Defence
New York Post
7 hours ago
- New York Post
US Coast Guard nabs 16 Mexican immigrants crammed aboard sailboat off the California coast
The US Coast Guard intercepted a 25-foot sailboat crammed with 16 illegal Mexican immigrants off the coast of California on Saturday and turned them over to the border patrol, the agency said. The crowded boat was spotted by a Coast Guard Lockheed C-130 Hercules airplane about 54 miles off the shore of Point Lima near San Diego, with a cutter then dispatched to intercept the craft, the Coast Guard said in a press release on Sunday. 3 The Coast Guard intercepted this sailboat about 54 miles off the coast of Point Loma, California. USCG 3 A sailboat stopped off the California shoreline was packed with 16 Mexican immigrants, officials said.. USCG The cutter Petrel then stopped the boat and took the immigrants into custody, the agency said. They said all of the migrants on board claimed they were Mexican nationals. The Coast Guard has stepped up efforts to intercept and transport migrants since President Donald Trump took office this year with a promise to deport illegal immigrants in the US. 3 The Saturday Coast Guard operation is the latest in a stepped up effort to stop immigrants trying to reach the US. USCG Earlier this month, another crew stopped a 'panga-style' boat loaded with Russian nationals and migrants from the Dominican Republic about 3 miles off the coast of Puerto Rico. In February, a Coast Guard cutter intercepted an 'overloaded' 30-foot sailboat boat packed with 132 Haitian migrants about 50 miles off the Florida coastline including women and children. In one of the largest high-seas intercept, more than 300 migrants from Haiti were stopped near the Bahamas trying to reach US soil and were returned back home in June of last year.
