Sports Chalet Lobster Contest Ill Conceived

[Leejnd]

I agree that it's wrong and ill-conceived. They should be encouraging people to leave the biggies, not take them. Any environmentalist (or anyone concerned about our local fisheries) should shudder at this.

Personally I think a letter writing campaign would be far more effective than any online petition or other type of action. If enough people write letters to the right people at SC, they'll hear the message. Whether they'll listen is a different story.

 

[merxlin]

I agree that letter writing is far more imprressive than email. Lets bury em in letters (hopefully they recycle)-

Send you correspondence to:

Sport Chalet
Attn: Norbert Olberz
1 Sport Chalet Dr.
La Cañada, CA 91011

 

[Leejnd]

Thanks for that! I'll send a letter off today.

 

[Sam Miller III]

Last season I wrote a note to Dale of CDN in opposition to the harvesting large lobsters and display of them and their proud smilling hunters with in the covers of his magazine. I did not expect him to publish it since I generally request that he does not publish my coments, but he did..

My justification comments were essentially as follows:

“The lobster population would remain stable if each legal female lobster produced, from the excess of 500,000 eggs it carries, a minimum of two lobsters that reached maturity with in its life time. As the lobster matures and increases in weight the number of eggs carried also increases. A ten and one half pound lobster, at fifteen to twenty or more years old, could carry in excess of one million eggs; producing at each mating season approximately four lobsters that will reach sexual maturity. This grand mother has probably mated ten or more seasons and could count perhaps thirty mature lobsters as off spring. She can now be expected to produce millions of eggs for many more seasons."

I do no recall one of you raising your voice or writting in support of this comment.
Now a year later you are suddenly opposed. A resonable and prudent person would question why? Aderation of the genie or a a quest for protection of a natural resource?

SDM

 

[merxlin]

Last season I wrote a note to Dale of CDN in opposition to the harvesting large lobsters and display of them and their proud smilling hunters with in the covers of his magazine. I did not expect him to publish it since I generally request that he does not publish my coments, but he did..

My justification comments were essentially as follows:

“The lobster population would remain stable if each legal female lobster produced, from the excess of 500,000 eggs it carries, a minimum of two lobsters that reached maturity with in its life time. As the lobster matures and increases in weight the number of eggs carried also increases. A ten and one half pound lobster, at fifteen to twenty or more years old, could carry in excess of one million eggs; producing at each mating season approximately four lobsters that will reach sexual maturity. This grand mother has probably mated ten or more seasons and could count perhaps thirty mature lobsters as off spring. She can now be expected to produce millions of eggs for many more seasons."

I do no recall one of you raising your voice or writting in support of this comment.
Now a year later you are suddenly opposed. A resonable and prudent person would question why? Aderation of the genie or a a quest for protection of a natural resource?

SDM

I'm not sure how best to respond to this. One direction is to applaud you for being forward thinking and apologize for everyone who did not respond as you would have liked. But that would indicate you made your statements for the reaction and not based on your belief that it was the right thing to do. That can't be right since that is what you insinuate we are doing.

So my next reaction would be to ask if we should all just sit back and be quiet because our motivation is not noble (your assessment assuming it is just for the anti-SC angle), even if it accomplishes our common goal? That's "baby out with the bathwater" thinking to me. Why deflate the enthusiasm of people who are wiling to act on behalf of a worthwhile cause? Sounds counterproductive to me. Just my 200 psi.

 

[Empty V]

I say we take a poll and see how many people on this thread saw sam's note in CDN. I'm going to guess that the number will be less than zero. I've never seen someone insult people for trying to make a difference. At least not people trying to accomplish the same goal as the insulter. Thanks for the support sam. Hey sam, why didn't you write the note to Dale the year before? Or the year before that? Or 4 years ago? Looks like a case of hypocrisy to me. I've noticed a pattern in Sam's posts, I call it fishing for praise and recognition. I guess none of us are as "reasonable or prudent" as you sam. I did learn a little bit from your post, I usually do I'll admit that. But, your delivery is atrocious and lacks tact.

I don't think that writing to SC or CDN is the way to go. Think bigger. It's time to start writing letters to DFG or whoever is in charge of the regulations. They can stop this, SC needs the publicity and there's no way they'll listen to people who don't have a stake in the company.

Billy

 

[Leejnd]

Uh...Sam...I can't speak for everyone else in this thread (although I think the two posts above mine do a good job of summing things up)...but in my case, I was barely out of OW certification and had never even heard of lobster hunting last year. I'm now one year and 96 dives into my new hobby, and am becoming more aware of the issues surrounding scuba, and the oceanic environment in general.

So does that answer your "reasonable and prudent" question as to why I am so "suddenly" opposed to this contest?

I for one do not particularly appreciate being called on the carpet for not having done something last year -- when I knew nothing about this. Isn't it good enough that I'm doing it this year? Or does the fact that I wasn't there to write in support of your letter then render my support now invalid? And, btw, what exactly IS "Aderation of the genie"?

I must agree with the above posters that its disingenuous at best to berate people who are attempting to do something good...whether you think it's late in the game or not.

But kudos to you for stepping up to the plate and speaking out last year.

 

[drbill]

Hey, don't worry, there is a bill on the table to make most of the West coast off limits to any fishing. That includes loster hunting.

To the best of my knowledge there is no truth to this. The MLPA will set aside protected no-take areas throughout the state, but it will hardly be 100% of the waters... closer to 20% of them. Personally, I'd think the wisdom of Solomon would suggest a 50/50 split between take and no take zones.

 

[drbill]

As the OP, let's keep this focused on the original subject. If Dive 'N' Surf and other shops are continuing to hold big lobster contests, I'd welcome the extension of this effort in their direction as well. Personally, I'd be surprised and disappointed if Bobby Meistrell has continued this since he has taken a positive direction on other issues such as spearing of black sea bass nd was a strong supporter of the Catalina Conservancy Divers.

 

[Codyjp]

I few months ago there was a really great artical that focused on the tuna fishing industry but also covered the creation of marine preserves and no fishing areas. The article references New Zealand as being tops for conservation with California being a close second. That was nice to hear, but it would sure be nice for there to be some protected areas along the coast. Is there any chance we can find the email for the fellas in charge at SC? And Dr. Bill, would you happen to know the best person/place to contact to petition for more protected marine areas?