No-Fly Zone Exceptions?

One thing I don't quite understand...

The territorial waters off Libya are a declared a no-fly zone by NATO, which means there will be a distinct absence of poaching surveillance in the region. NATO is not interested in illegal fishing operations, and no European Union or International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) inspectors will be allowed into the Libyan zone.

The Greenpeace Foundation is not conducting a bluefin tuna campaign, meaning that the only protection for the highly endangered bluefin tuna will be at the presence of two Sea Shepherd’s vessels: the flagship Steve Irwin and the soon to be renamed fast interceptor vessel. The only non-military aircraft in this zone will be Sea Shepherd’s helicopter the Nancy Burnet onboard the Steve Irwin.

If the UN no-fly zone extends of Libyan waters, and the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is flying their helicopter, doesn't that make the helicopter in violation of the no-fly zone?

With all the littoral warfare we have seen in Libyan territorial waters, I think Sea Shepherd is in danger of getting in way over their heads. Not only is it a bad idea to stroll in unarmed during a gunfight, but how is it the Sea Shepherd Conversation Society can fly a helicopter in a UN mandated no-fly zone but no aircraft from the European Union or International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) inspectors will be allowed into the Libyan zone?

This sets up a awkward scenario where some hot shot pilot from Qatar or UAE starts an international incident with an air-to-air kill legal under the UN resolution.

Worth noting, a NGO is adding a new element to a modern maritime battlefield, and that element can be exploited tactically to kill people. The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society appears to be unaware of how the fog of war has a history of winning in the littoral, and no amount of new technology has changed that reality.