Change.org Petition, Stop Shark Baiting

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Nicely put, Mr. Chen. I agree that this is something that needs to be debated.

HalcyonDaze,

Yep, the 72 Bullshark deaths would be what I'm talkin' about. I was aware that it was reported by others. This disgusting behavior is right in line with the Japanese whale research model. The sharks don't need that kind of "friendship"! I've come to distrust scientists as I get older. It is an industry.

In todays newspaper is a column speaking about well known Indian River Lagoon problems likely caused by ag runoff, septic systems, and lawn chemical runoff as confirmed by 6 studies between 1985 and 2000--yet the 4 teams of scientists need another 3-4 years to finalize their new study and report. It's just an employment scam for these folks! The Lagoon dies, these scientists study it until it does so; and then will likely try to scam the taxpayers some more studying why it died! Inaction is why and the same applies to sharks, somebody studies them until they disappear and then wonders WHY!!

As you probably know, around here one does not need to feed to see sharks--feeding is only done to bring'em in close so shark picture opportunities are improved!

Thank you for lumping myself and a number of friends and colleagues in with Japanese whalers. I would be exactly as justified to lump all divers in with the often-incompetent holiday warriors I encounter on Key Largo cattle boats. Or all divemasters and instructors with the twit who once criticized me as having a "low level of certification and a low level of activity" ... and gave a free pass to the wannabe who had less than a third of my total dives and got certified at some point after I'd racked up my 300th dive and worked on dive projects with three federal agencies and five major research institutes over an eight-year period. But he was going for his instructor cert after nine months and 100 dives, which apparently made him more qualified than moi.

Has it occurred to you that the particular scientists you're criticizing here are in the pickle of reporting not to fellow academics, but to elected or appointed public officials (therefore, directly or indirectly selected by John Q. Public, i.e. us)? NOAA is under the Department of Commerce, which means their mandate is not ooshy-gooshy Save the Fishies; it's to ensure that fisheries remain stable for future harvesting. They balance conservation interests against those of the commercial and recreational fishing guys. Sometimes this works spectacularly well - the Alaskan fisheries are generally considered a global model for sustainability. Other times it doesn't; you get complaints on both sides of either NMFS being too conservative with their stock estimates or giving the fishing industry too much leeway with quotas. This is why I would like to ask some questions regarding the ongoing pre-season "research fishery;" I want to know what data and policies are coming out of it and whether alternatives have been considered.

The Water Management Districts (disclosure; I occasionally work with the South Florida Water Management District under contract) are in an even worse bind. Employment scam? SFWMD got gutted a few years back, and when I was last there the then-new director (who is rarely if ever a scientist; instead it's typically some crony of the governor or one of his big donors) was quoted in the paper - before even talking to the staff - that he intended to cut the "dead wood" out of the organization that had already let somewhere around 100 people go and was heavily reliant on contractors for even basic functions.

I state this because the inaction you speak of is not scientists stringing out an "employment scam" - it is because the agencies they work for are directed by public officials (or appointees of said public officials) who (in this state, at least) are often elected largely on the promise that they are going to do certain interests favors. Among those favors is often the promise not to bother John Q. Public for pesky things like taxes to fund agencies or bothersome regulations about how you take care of your lawn or dispose of your sewage. All those reports and studies often come to nothing because the people who are supposed to translate that science into public policy sit on them. All the good science in the book doesn't come to squat if the people who are supposed to act on it are in the tank for the folks who don't want anything done about it. You want to change that, don't disparage me and my colleagues - put people in office who are going to listen to us the next time an election rolls around.
 
Nicely put, Mr. Chen. I agree that this is something that needs to be debated.



Thank you for lumping myself and a number of friends and colleagues in with Japanese whalers. I would be exactly as justified to lump all divers in with the often-incompetent holiday warriors I encounter on Key Largo cattle boats. Or all divemasters and instructors with the twit who once criticized me as having a "low level of certification and a low level of activity" ... and gave a free pass to the wannabe who had less than a third of my total dives and got certified at some point after I'd racked up my 300th dive and worked on dive projects with three federal agencies and five major research institutes over an eight-year period. But he was going for his instructor cert after nine months and 100 dives, which apparently made him more qualified than moi.

Has it occurred to you that the particular scientists you're criticizing here are in the pickle of reporting not to fellow academics, but to elected or appointed public officials (therefore, directly or indirectly selected by John Q. Public, i.e. us)? NOAA is under the Department of Commerce, which means their mandate is not ooshy-gooshy Save the Fishies; it's to ensure that fisheries remain stable for future harvesting. They balance conservation interests against those of the commercial and recreational fishing guys. Sometimes this works spectacularly well - the Alaskan fisheries are generally considered a global model for sustainability. Other times it doesn't; you get complaints on both sides of either NMFS being too conservative with their stock estimates or giving the fishing industry too much leeway with quotas. This is why I would like to ask some questions regarding the ongoing pre-season "research fishery;" I want to know what data and policies are coming out of it and whether alternatives have been considered.

The Water Management Districts (disclosure; I occasionally work with the South Florida Water Management District under contract) are in an even worse bind. Employment scam? SFWMD got gutted a few years back, and when I was last there the then-new director (who is rarely if ever a scientist; instead it's typically some crony of the governor or one of his big donors) was quoted in the paper - before even talking to the staff - that he intended to cut the "dead wood" out of the organization that had already let somewhere around 100 people go and was heavily reliant on contractors for even basic functions.

I state this because the inaction you speak of is not scientists stringing out an "employment scam" - it is because the agencies they work for are directed by public officials (or appointees of said public officials) who (in this state, at least) are often elected largely on the promise that they are going to do certain interests favors. Among those favors is often the promise not to bother John Q. Public for pesky things like taxes to fund agencies or bothersome regulations about how you take care of your lawn or dispose of your sewage. All those reports and studies often come to nothing because the people who are supposed to translate that science into public policy sit on them. All the good science in the book doesn't come to squat if the people who are supposed to act on it are in the tank for the folks who don't want anything done about it. You want to change that, don't disparage me and my colleagues - put people in office who are going to listen to us the next time an election rolls around.

I think that means find somebody else than Scott to be governor :) not that i voted for him in the 1st place.

comparing the Japanese whalers to the scientists is as bad as comparing the Inuit to the Japanese whalers
 
I think that means find somebody else than Scott to be governor :) not that i voted for him in the 1st place.

comparing the Japanese whalers to the scientists is as bad as comparing the Inuit to the Japanese whalers

I LIKE that last bit and agree re:the gov, Mr Max Headroom. But I was comparing Fairies and The Travelocity garden gnome!:duck:
 
Last edited:
Randy has not done a particularly good job changing shark behavior. I did 6 dives with him last weekend. We saw a whopping 5 sharks, never more than one at a time and none on a couple of the dives. Not much action and 70F at the bottom made me wish for my drysuit. Fortunately, we did have a great hammer and a tiger among the visitors. I hope this weekend will be better and the sharks all remember their modified behavior.
I would be interested to find out which group has more individuals who play an active role in shark conservation through donations, volunteer work etc: photographers, videographers and other shark feed attendants or people who fight for laws to outlaw shark feeding.
 
Are you saying those who dive to observe don't participate in conservation events?
 
I LIKE that last bit and agree re:the gov, Mr Max Headroom. But I was comparing Fairies and The Travelocity garden gnome!:duck:

actually Max Headroom would make a better governor :) and we shall try not to let this thread dive any farther towards the Pub

unless somebody wants to join me for a drink in the pub on sat..
 
Are you saying those who dive to observe don't participate in conservation events?

I definitely wouldn't say that. I'll agree that if you don't mind baited dives, want to see sharks at close quarters, and are a very self-sufficient diver the Emerald is the boat to go on. With that said, some of the other boats in the Palm Beach County area that don't do baited dives are pretty good at finding sharks and are no slouches in the conservation advocacy department. While I still go out with Randy semi-regularly (five times in the past year) for shark dives, on average I'm probably on the Narcosis more often and I got my introduction to shark diving PBC on Sandy's Sunday. I can't recommend the latter two enough if you want to take your chances on just observing sharks without having bait present.

I agree with docmartin's assessment as to Randy's success rate. I've done a total of 14 dives off the Emerald, and we had what I'll term "sharky sharks" (i.e. something other than nurse sharks) on 9 of them. Of those, 7 were what I'd consider "hot" - sharks coming in close for the bait, as opposed to just one or a few checking us out at range and leaving without a snack. I've been on the Jupiter Wreck Trek for four dives off the Emerald and I've only seen one bull shark there that wasn't even interested in the bait and kept her distance. Better odds than a lot of dive ops, but not a surefire feeding frenzy by a long shot.
 
I've been really making an effort to not slander or take sides in this thread. Those who are against shark feeding feel strongly about it. Those who are for it, besides yourself, are just troll posting. If we don't know the side effects of feeding, then why do we it? To make a buck? Sharks are animals and will adapt to environmental changes. They've done it for millions of years against all odds. Does this mean it's more dangerous for divers? Who knows. I realize these changes don't equate to every shark encounter nor to every shark, because it would be impossible to hand feed every shark in the ocean and not all sharks will respond the same.

I've only witnessed one shark stalking (I use that term lightly) a dive I was on after stealing a speared lionfish at the beginning of the dive. It was swimming close to divers (within a couple of feet) and hanging around, probably hoping for another free meal. I wasn't afraid, I didn't even know it took the lionfish. I did think it odd that it was hanging around pretty close when all my other encounters with sharks resulted in them acting like we either weren't there or they swam away maintaining their distance. Is it a modified behavior, who knows, but it was an unexpected behavior none the less. You dismissed me in the other thread simply based on a dive count, which was semi insulting, as if I'm not intelligent enough to recognize a different behavior than previous encounters. This behavior could be learned from associating the sound of the spear hitting the reef based on past interactions with spear fisherman and have absolutely nothing to do with Randy's feeding. In all fairness, I've yet to see anyone trying to ban spearfishing.

In the end, do whatever as long as it's legal. I mostly dive the reefs off Jupter/WPB within state waters, so keep the feeding beyond the boundary and it's a non issue. I doubt the change.org petition will amount to anything since anyone can go there and create a petition. If Randy broke the law, then he should have the book thrown at him for his post comments about his business thriving because of publicity. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. Will I ever dive his boat? Who knows. Not every trip he does is for feeding. I do hope he has contingency plans for the day that an accident does happen. I don't want to see him get hurt, and I also didn't want to see Steve Irwin get hurt, but sh*t happens. Sharks and all animals are unpredictable and in one video, he was handling a pretty excited tiger. To his credit, he remained calm and managed the situation, but it was close. Human are fragile, all it would take is a tooth to accidentally swipe his hand or arm and you'll have blood in the water. But that's the risk he and the divers take. I'll pass, diving is dangerous enough, and I make decisions to make diving safer, not dangerous, so that I can return home at the end of the day to my daughters.
 
This silly petition conveniently leaves out the fact that these shark feeding dives are raising awareness for our sharks, some of which are endangered. The information stated is not accurate.

I can tell you with certainty that Randy, the guys at Calypso, the photographers I've dived with & I all want what to help the sharks and protect them from fishing & culling.
 
https://xf2.scubaboard.com/community/forums/cave-diving.45/

Back
Top Bottom