Observing versus touching

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!

There are a lot of good reasons not to touch the sealife except of course for the obvious exceptions (i.e. hunting). The reason is simply that you can accidentally hurt them or yourself. A big dolphin for example can kick your face with its tail while "playing" and knock your lights out including your regulator. Or you may transfer parasites from the bottom to their skin and vice versa... The possibilities of something going wrong are endless so unless that sealife is for dinner, I would just look and not touch.

Some people do not listen until something goes wrong so if I was you I would negotiate the "no touch" policy as a condition for diving. I do that with my 11-year old who is a new diver and like any other child "sees" by touching or picking up.
 
There are a lot of good reasons not to touch the sealife except of course for the obvious exceptions (i.e. hunting). The reason is simply that you can accidentally hurt them or yourself. A big dolphin for example can kick your face with its tail while "playing" and knock your lights out including your regulator. Or you may transfer parasites from the bottom to their skin and vice versa... The possibilities of something going wrong are endless so unless that sealife is for dinner, I would just look and not touch.

Some people do not listen until something goes wrong so if I was you I would negotiate the "no touch" policy as a condition for diving. I do that with my 11-year old who is a new diver and like any other child "sees" by touching or picking up.

I think the whole notion of transferring parasites to a dolphin is overblown. If you've ever watched them play among themselves they use ... among other things ... their teeth. And many dolphins actually have rather prominent bite marks on their skin. Also observe how they "scratch" themselves using corals and rocks. Somehow I don't think a human hand is going to do them any harm. Same goes for seals and sea lions.

I'm not promoting forced interaction here ... and I quite agree that whenever you interact with a wild animal you risk potential that the animal can hurt you ... but it pains me to see misinformation perpetuated on the internet.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

---------- Post added June 24th, 2014 at 08:19 AM ----------

... and sometimes it's not you who does the touching ...

P8060322.jpg


... Bob (Grateful Diver)
 
And the sea animals get even. I've been bitten by a barracuda, had crown of thorns spines in my ankle and thumb, fire coral stings on my lips, face, ankles, urchin spines in more than a couple fingers, fish spines under my cuticles, thumbs. One cubera snapper almost knocked my implant tooth out as I was bringing it out of a hole after I shot it. haha. yep.

But I do try NOT to do damage. However, in the heat of gathering food….sometimes it happens.
 
I don't hunt underwater (but I'd like to). My rule for touching the ocean creatures is the same as petting a dog I don't know. Most likely not a good idea.

Walking down a street in Dallas, I'm not just sticking my hand out to pet a pit bull that I don't know.
 
This is only anecdotal, but some long time divers I've spoken with say that the amount of sea and coral life they used to see has greatly diminished over the past decades. I'm sure that there are any number of reasons for this, but I also think it is safe to assume that the huge increase in diving and divers has contributed to this reduction. To the extent that is true, we are stressing the environment when we dive. If we want to respect and hopefully be able to pass it on to future generations, it just seems basic common sense to do all we can to minimize the stress.

Yes I am part of the problem, that does not undermine my point.
 
This is only anecdotal, but some long time divers I've spoken with say that the amount of sea and coral life they used to see has greatly diminished over the past decades. I'm sure that there are any number of reasons for this, but I also think it is safe to assume that the huge increase in diving and divers has contributed to this reduction. To the extent that is true, we are stressing the environment when we dive. If we want to respect and hopefully be able to pass it on to future generations, it just seems basic common sense to do all we can to minimize the stress.

Yes I am part of the problem, that does not undermine my point.

No ... there has been no huge increase in diving and divers for quite some time ... and the amount of area that divers affect is miniscule in relation to the damage that has been done to our oceans. The culprits are many ... we can start with stormwater runoff, which has affected coastal areas immensely. Every time we pave over another street or parking lot we remove some of nature's filters ... allowing more and more untreated water to drain into our waterways. And as Gil in "Finding Nemo" so astutely put it ... all drains lead to the ocean. For coastal areas, stormwater runoff from development is one of the most significant factors leading to polluted waterways. Add to that untreated wastewater ... which in many parts of the world is the only kind of wastewater there is. Even some significant cities in the world still just dump their untreated wastewater a mile or two offshore and take the attitude "the solution to pollution is dilution" ... that's been a mantra used around the world for way too many years, and the cumulative effects have been catastrophic. But wastewater treatment plants are expensive, and without the money and will, that problem will get worse. Head off to some of the undeveloped parts of the world and you'll find that, culturally, people just dump their trash in the water. Check out beaches in popular diving areas like Bunaken and Raja Ampat and it's enough to make you weep. Too many people worry about damaging marine life by touching it without giving a thought to the damage that comes from them eating plastics, or getting entangled in ghost nets ... or the ever-popular practice of "dynamite fishing".

And let's not forget what the demand for tuna, shark-fin soup, and other markets around the world do when they remove the top predators from the food chain ... or the catastrophic effects of invasive species like the Caribbean lionfish, which were the result of careless human interaction that had nothing at all to do with scuba diving.

Add to that water pollution, acidification, changing weather patterns and other cumulative human effects that change the water conditions these creatures are used to living in, and you get things like the massive sea star die-off that's affecting the whole west coast of North America right now ... whole species dying off and we don't even know why, or whether or not there's anything we can do to change it. What we do know is that in just a couple short years the whole life cycle has changed, and species that once were kept in check through predation are now becoming dominant ... to the detriment of many other species.

The effects of scuba diving interaction is nothing ... not even in the noise level ... compared to the effects that massive development and population have had on our oceans over the past 50 years. But as long as there's money to be made by destroying our oceans and wiping out entire species within it, there will be plenty of people who will rationalize why it's OK. And there will be far too little effort put into doing something about it ... particularly finding solutions that are easily within our grasp, but because they would cost money and increase taxes, won't be utilized. Far easier to focus on the little things that don't make a damn bit of difference, but give people a sense that they're actually doing something to address the problem ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
 
I think the whole notion of transferring parasites to a dolphin is overblown. If you've ever watched them play among themselves they use ... among other things ... their teeth. And many dolphins actually have rather prominent bite marks on their skin. Also observe how they "scratch" themselves using corals and rocks. Somehow I don't think a human hand is going to do them any harm. Same goes for seals and sea lions.

I'm not promoting forced interaction here ... and I quite agree that whenever you interact with a wild animal you risk potential that the animal can hurt you ... but it pains me to see misinformation perpetuated on the internet.

Seeing parasites in action particularly at the Aquarium setting where I get to be in close proximity to the animals, I would say it is not overblown although it is a bit different because the animals are also in close proximity. But could not help noticing holes on the turtles shells and other damage done by parasites. In the ocean one could think that this would be a bite... Either way I am with you on the parasite exaggeration but I am not exaggerating about the "friendly" dolphins. Lifeguards at Santa Monica beach always empty the water when large dolphins are in the area because their friendliness can injure someone by accident...

BTW, I love to hunt so I do interact with sealife my way. I think the OP meant it as a habit rather than the occassional or incidental petting. I dove many times with sea lions at the Santa Barbara Island rookery and it is tempting to touch them but was warned many times of the damage their mother or themselves can make... Yet they appear very cute and innocent. The OP should bring his friend to Monterey to dive with sea otters. They are very cute and responsive to petting ;-)
 
(SNIP)(see above for entire post)
The effects of scuba diving interaction is nothing ... not even in the noise level ... compared to the effects that massive development and population have had on our oceans over the past 50 years. But as long as there's money to be made by destroying our oceans and wiping out entire species within it, there will be plenty of people who will rationalize why it's OK. And there will be far too little effort put into doing something about it ... particularly finding solutions that are easily within our grasp, but because they would cost money and increase taxes, won't be utilized. Far easier to focus on the little things that don't make a damn bit of difference, but give people a sense that they're actually doing something to address the problem ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Thank you for the thoughtful informative reply.

At the risk of getting too woo -woo and New Agey, I'd suggest that maybe taking personal responsibility for minimizing touching and stressing in marine environments can lead to more macro actions. Yes, I was recently in Thailand and somewhat dismayed at the garbage, and the industrial scale night fishing that literally lit up the entire arc of horizon I could see off the shore. But it still didn't make me feel better about accidentally brushing the reef with my fins. I still tried to minimize my impact.

If I could somehow help Ko Tao better manage its runoff, I would do so. I think there is a realization that they are perhaps 'loving it too death' and that that could result in a loss of tourism dollars.

But really what I came away with was a sense of urgency to see as much as of the world's oceans as I can before it's too late.
 
There's a difference between trying to minimize ones impact (a good thing) and creating artificial "rules of behavior" based on irrational pronouncements of harm. You will not harm a fish or coral by brushing against it, this happens all the time in the natural setting. There is nothing toxic about human flesh or neoprene. We will harm fish or coral if 10 people brush against it day after day, week in week out. So the harm being done by divers is not the individual touch but the over use of select sites.
The no touch mantra does not play as stridently in this region because we have few divers and a lot of coastline. I can see why it would get more traction in destination resorts where countless tourists are funneled towards the same few reefs. To me, it's the funneling that causes harm - not the touching.
 
I personally consider any dive where contact was made with any living coral, fish, or crustacean to be a failure and an opportunity to improve my diving skills for the future. On the other hand, I agree that with the stated opinion that the sum total of all worldwide recreational scuba impact pales in comparison to even one small nation's commercial fishing impact. But that doesn't mean we can't set a good example.

It's never made sense to me at all how you have this group of people (divers) who are fascinated with the beauty and complexity of the undersea world, and then they get off the boat and go have lobster and grouper for dinner. It's not like I think lobstering or spearing or even commercial fishing is morally wrong, but how can you have a true sense of wonder about undersea animals and then also enjoy killing them and eating them. I've always been in the extreme minority on this, and that's fine, but it just never made sense. I've never touched (or eaten) an undersea animal on purpose for as long as I've been an adult, and I never will.
 

Back
Top Bottom