Wildlife Protection Around "Non-Sanctuary" Dive Sites

[ScubaSteve]

Do you really feel the kid is going to encourage more octopus hunting? Has octopus hunting been a problem in the past?

Can you produce numbers saying that the GPO exists in numbers that would allow the legal limit of 1 per day per hunter without endangering the species as a whole? Or even endangering them in this area which is REALLY the issue I believe. The only thing I was able to find was something that said there really was no definite population confirmation.......which means it could go either way. I for one would rather err on the side of caution when it comes to the possible endangering of an entire area population.

Your mileage obviously varies.

Hunters are usually allowed to hunt on public land should not spearfishermen have the right to hunt in a public ocean?

Sure....and if you paid attention, what Bob and others are trying to do, is to make that area a Private No-Take area....the same as private property essentially. Bob is not saying what the kid did was illegal.....just trying to protect that area for what they use it for (revenue generation).

 

[Zieg]

Can you produce numbers saying that the GPO exists in numbers that would allow the legal limit of 1 per day per hunter without endangering the species as a whole? Or even endangering them in this area which is REALLY the issue I believe. The only thing I was able to find was something that said there really was no definite population confirmation.......which means it could go either way. I for one would rather err on the side of caution when it comes to the possible endangering of an entire area population.

Your mileage obviously varies.



Sure....and if you paid attention, what Bob and others are trying to do, is to make that area a Private No-Take area....the same as private property essentially. Bob is not saying what the kid did was illegal.....just trying to protect that area for what they use it for (revenue generation).

So Steve, not as an argument, but your post made me think, and I ask, does anyone know what the GPO fishery in Washington is like? How many are taken by divers, fishermen, commercial fishermen?

 

[drbill]

As one who worked for and strongly supported marine protected areas (MPAs) here in the state of California, I would actually have to disagree somewhat. I think divers should do what they can to educate those who would take from such sites but I think the way to go about this is to get effective networks of MPAs established in your area. We treated the Casino Point Dive Park as a de facto MPA for decades (I actually thought it was initially). Fortunately city ordinance prevents spearfishing in city waters and the boundary line around the park prevents fishing at least from boats. Fishing from the breakwater on the park's shore was legal, but we could ask people to stop due to the safety issue of possibly hooking divers.

Work to create an effective network of MPAs wherever you are. I would love to see about 30% of our ocean shoreline so protected, both to preserve sanctuaries where fish and inverts can survive and to better ensure spillover into adjacent areas where those who take can also benefit.

 

[ScubaSteve]

So Steve, not as an argument, but your post made me think, and I ask, does anyone know what the GPO fishery in Washington is like? How many are taken by divers, fishermen, commercial fishermen?

All I can say is when I read what I stated in my previous email, I stopped searching so I really cannot say for certain. I am sure that the process that Bob and the local people have started, will bring said information to light if it exists either way. And either the local hunters or divers may already have something.....if they do, I am sure it will come out.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Thank you for admitting the truth Bob, it is all about money.

Well, that's that you choose to believe, and it's been well argued elsewhere, so I won't bother debating it again. But that is one of the arguments we'll be presenting in Olympia tomorrow. If you're opposed, you're welcome to come and present your views ... it's an open session, and anyone who wishes to speak can do so. Dylan has been invited, and two of our senior members have offered to drive him to the hearing. I hope he accepts.

Regardless of what Dan says you are talking about a stretch of ocean, not a zoo. petting or otherwise. The animals there are wild they are not pets. Personally I do not believe anyone has a right to exclusive use of the ocean. You and your group is appealing to "big government" not the spearfishermen, they want the freedom to hunt where they want to hunt and you want to restrict that freedom. Hunters are usually allowed to hunt on public land should not spearfishermen have the right to hunt in a public ocean?

Actually, the majority of our local spearos believe that what Dylan did was wrong ... however they feel about my response to it. They're not opposed at all to the local protections we're seeking ... because they'd never consider hunting there anyway. Most spearos are responsible enough to understand that they are part of a larger community that has to share a resource, and the best way to manage it is to find compromises that accommodates everyone. Because otherwise, reactions can have consequences that will not work in their best interest.

I saw the photos you posted online of the kid. He did not pull the octo out in a crowded beach. The only people visible in photo are you and him. Nobody would even know about it until you brought it to their attention and started a posse to track him down. Do you realize that you come across as strange as those PETA people that throw paint on peoples' furs?

What you don't see is the parking lot filling up with divers gearing up for a chance to go see that animal. And I do realize that's how you choose to see me, but I am comfortable with how I'm seen in my local community. I have friends who hunt and spearfish ... and know pretty much all the regulars who fish on the adjacent pier. They like me ... whenever I find fishing tackle, I go out there and return their lost property.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Zieg]

All I can say is when I read what I stated in my previous email, I stopped searching so I really cannot say for certain. I am sure that the process that Bob and the local people have started, will bring said information to light if it exists either way. And either the local hunters or divers may already have something.....if they do, I am sure it will come out.

Personally I see this same thing mirrored here in Florida. To me, this is a test case, demonstrating about how to, and how not to, handle these situations. These kind of ****-storms don't benefit anyone and are waaaaaay to easy to get emotionally caught up in.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Sure....and if you paid attention, what Bob and others are trying to do, is to make that area a Private No-Take area....the same as private property essentially. Bob is not saying what the kid did was illegal.....just trying to protect that area for what they use it for (revenue generation).

I'm not even doing that. Frankly, the majority of my classes are taught elsewhere. The revenue generation angle of this has nothing to do with classes, and everything to do with the tourists who fly to Seattle from elsewhere to see these animals. That revenue goes to local businesses like restaurants and hotels, as well as some of the local dive shops. If you were to read the comments attached to the petitions that are being signed for this effort you might be surprised by how many of them are from out of state people who come here for vacations. I might teach an occasional class to some of those people ... but for the most part, they're not coming here for training. So their presence doesn't benefit me in any way.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

---------- Post Merged at 07:09 AM ---------- Previous Post was at 07:05 AM ----------

So Steve, not as an argument, but your post made me think, and I ask, does anyone know what the GPO fishery in Washington is like? How many are taken by divers, fishermen, commercial fishermen?

No data exists that I'm aware of. Local experience would indicate that the numbers of people taking octopus are very small. But that's going to make our proposal an easy decision. Who benefits from leaving it open (few) vs who benefits by closing this area to octopus hunting (many). The latter bring revenue into the state ... the former do not.

Slam dunk ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[ScubaSteve]

Personally I see this same thing mirrored here in Florida. To me, this is a test case, demonstrating about how to, and how not to, handle these situations. These kind of ****-storms don't benefit anyone and are waaaaaay to easy to get emotionally caught up in.

I don't think anybody would disagree with that. Obviously Cove 2 had a nice working relationship between divers-hunters-wildlife because it has been this long before someone stole the star attraction. Dylan likely just saw an opportunity and went for it (knowing it was legal) and likely did not think about the possible consequences/ramifications of his actions until confronted. Of course that seems to be when stubbornness and arrogance took control of his mental faculties and we landed where we are.

I suspect that everybody involved has learned from this experience and hopefully the GPO will end up protected (perhaps that whole area turned into a no take zone), then allowing the divers to continue to enjoy and profit from that area, and also allowing the hunters to continue to hunt in other areas.

---------- Post Merged at 10:12 AM ---------- Previous Post was at 10:10 AM ----------

I'm not even doing that. Frankly, the majority of my classes are taught elsewhere. The revenue generation angle of this has nothing to do with classes, and everything to do with the tourists who fly to Seattle from elsewhere to see these animals. That revenue goes to local businesses like restaurants and hotels, as well as some of the local dive shops. If you were to read the comments attached to the petitions that are being signed for this effort you might be surprised by how many of them are from out of state people who come here for vacations. I might teach an occasional class to some of those people ... but for the most part, they're not coming here for training. So their presence doesn't benefit me in any way.

Sorry Bob, I was not saying your specific revenue generation......but the areas. I did figure you taught more there but this has gone well beyond "just Bob" so it was really about "they" as in the dive community and local businesses.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I suspect that everybody involved has learned from this experience and hopefully the GPO will end up protected (perhaps that whole area turned into a no take zone), then allowing the divers to continue to enjoy and profit from that area, and also allowing the hunters to continue to hunt in other areas.

Exactly! We are NOT trying to turn this into a conflict with hunters. We've invited them to be part of the process to assure that everyone gets something they can feel good about. That's happening. Oddly, it seems the only hunters who feel threatened by what we're doing live somewhere else, and don't come here to hunt. The protection zone we're seeking is very specific and applies only to GPO's. Hunters aren't threatened by it because until last week none of them ever hunted there ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[danvolker]

Sure....and if you paid attention, what Bob and others are trying to do, is to make that area a Private No-Take area....the same as private property essentially. Bob is not saying what the kid did was illegal.....just trying to protect that area for what they use it for (revenue generation).

I would stress that while Bob and a few dive shops may be motivated by revenue ( which is not a crime), if that was what this thread was about, it would have died almost instantly. The issue is thousands of divers wanting to be able to get an experience, much like as in a zoo...but in this case, a "swim through" Zoo where the wild life can wander.

Thousands of divers crave a form of experience, that this kid was happy to attempt to "rob" them of. At least then....Maybe now, not so much, or maybe even more so---how can we have any idea?

Maybe what needs to happen is the divers that want the underwater zoo, get the MPA designation.....And maybe, the hunters need to lobby for their own "underwater Hunting preserve", where they can concentrate marine life, much like herding fish into a barrel, and then start blasting. I am friends with many land based hunters, that like the actual hunt, the nature trek, the tracking, the need to be part of nature to succeed. And I have heard them talk with disdain, about private hunting trips rich people could do, where for a few grand, a cow or horse gets slaughtered, then dragged a few miles, and hung...hung at a perfect vantage point for the rich hunters to see from their luxury perch and "campsite"...So they can enjoy drinks and food, and then at some point the guide alerts them that the Grizzly Bear ( or whatever) that has follwed the scent, is almost to the "bait"....the "big game hunters" get to their nice shooting stands, and set up on their long scopes, and then WWIII begins, as the rush to kill the evil bear commences.
So a private hunting preserve may well be what this kid wants, and some that have been arguing so compulsively in his defense. If so, I would be fine with you guys getting your own u/w hunting preserves, where you can simulate anything from what the kid had at the Cove, to some u/w equivalent of the bear hunt.

I still say the "real u/w hunters" will want nothing like that, and will want to hunt where others are not, and will want the challenge of existing in the ecosystem of another world, and doing this as if they were a part of it. At least that is how all the hunters I know feel about this, and I am still blown away there are hunters here on SB that would prefer the yuppie alternative.