I have been doing a lot of research into the background of the issue. I have been on the Blue Heron Bridge Club facebook page for years, and recently found the Preservation Society facebook page.
Over the last few months, the fishing controversy caught my attention, and I wanted to run some ideas past this group first, before I take ideas to the facebook group. I understand that the leaders of the movement to make BHB a no-take collection site are no longer on Scubaboard, and I am trying to make sure I understand the history fully, so that all efforts are pointed in the right direction.
I must say, it is incredibly impressive how the diving community came together to protect the diversity of the BHB. I am hoping that we can now come together (maybe even with the fishermen) to protect each other, and to protect this gem of a site.
When I first dove (pun intended) into this topic, I was 100% on board with fighting as hard as possible to protect the park, and make it a marine sanctuary. When I was reading all of the different perspectives I could find, though, I can see points from all sides of this issue. For the safety of divers, Dan Volker made a great point many years ago:
This quote right here really shifted my thinking on this subject.
It is SO easy to get caught up in the tribalism that seems pervasive throughout all aspects of our society. We see it every day, but I really hope we can figure out a way to come together on this issue. I believe most everyone truly wants the same thing, we just need to figure out how to get there.
The divers' stories lately are awful. I am sure we can all sympathize with every diver who has gotten hooked or netted there. The abhorrent behaviors of a few puts lives at risk, and this needs to be addressed.
On the other hand, we've got the fishermen. It is interesting reading the comments on Dr. Botel's facebook post, because it gives us a lot of insight into what the fishing community is thinking. Part of the problem is ignorance. I don't mean that in the ugly way, but the literal definition. They do not know better. I'll list the things that I've found that they don't know:
They don't know the significance of this dive site for divers and for our marine ecosystem in general.
They don't understand that divers cannot see a line or hook in the water, typically until it is too late.
They don't understand that "hooking" a diver can literally kill them.
Some of them actually believe that divers get hooked on purpose just to spite them.
They don't even understand that we are only diving once a day (except for the night dives.)
Divers on the other hand look at the fishermen and see a few things: we see the lines and hooks and sinkers on the ocean floor, entangling our beloved critters. We see fish hooked through their bodies, dying. A moray eel swimming with a weight dragging behind it. We see our friends and loved ones being put at risk, sometimes intentionally, sometimes accidentally. And we cannot understand why in the world they can't just fish of the fishing pier in the park. (And it seems to be a prevalent theory that the fishermen only want to fish from the bridge so they can drink alcohol. Fishermen say they want to fish there because parking the park is ridiculous. Which, to be fair, is 100% true. At least we can agree on one thing!)
I believe a couple of things happened this year, and someone correct me if I'm wrong. There were some rare instances of divers getting hooked, especially on night dives. Someone reached out to FDOT and got a sympathetic ear. FDOT put up signs on Feb 22nd with "no fishing" on the East side of the BHB. The fishermen still had access to fishing at the park, but just from the old bridge fishing pier. Fishermen threw a fit. Dr. Julia Botel, Riviera Beach got involved. She made a call to FDOT, who pulled the signs down, stating that they did not go through the proper process. She started a dialogue between fishermen and divers, and was supposed to be working on a solution. Unfortunately, this all happened to be around election time, and once she was re-elected, suddenly, it was much less urgent. I don't think she's made a public statement on the issue since her re-election.
Since the signs went up and came back down, the fishermen became a dangerous combination of reckless and spiteful. They have started intentionally hooking divers much more often, much more brazenly, and fully unapologetic. Divers have been netted and screamed at, intentionally. It's an ugly situation.
I think there are a few different ways to proceed forward, and it each comes with its own drawbacks.
The first option is for the diving community to aggressively court the fishermen, offering up an olive branch, offering up education, and trying really damn hard to negotiate some peace terms.
The next option would be going back to FDOT. Now that situation is very interesting. I talked to the comms director for FDOT, and he pleaded ignorance on the entire ordeal. It struck me as very odd. But he did say that FDOT will NOT take sides in something like this. They will only get involved if it can be established that fishing from the bridge is in some way impeding traffic, be it pedestrian, cyclists, or autos. If, for example, line and hooks is left on the bridge. If fish remains are left on the bridge. If casting is also hooking pedestrians or cyclists, then they will put signs up. This is likely the most rapid remedy, because divers have already been collecting evidence of exactly this, and I'm fully confident that if I put out a request for more evidence, it will be easy to get. I may go ahead and ask for evidence of this as a "just in case" in the event that other ideas do not work.
And the nuclear option would be to push again for FWC (possibly in partnership with PBC?) to be designated as a marine sanctuary with no rec fishing allowed at all. This has been discussed fairly extensively, but the risks of asking for regulations of that sort are that we regulate ourselves out of a dive site. The flilp side of that coin, though, is this: if we were to get sanctuary designation, could we have a "tag" system similar to Bonaire, in which divers pay, say $25 a year to dive in the marine park? This would address some of the funding issues that have been brought up frequently.
One thing that confounds me is this: The park is a county park, not a city park. So why is the city council even involved with the fishing discussion? Why was Dr. Botel under the impression that FDOT needed her permission to do something that was 100% within their purview to do. Only FDOT has a say in whether fishing is allowed from an FDOT bridge. I snagged this picture from one of the other discussions on this topic.
Anyways, my thought is: we tackle all three approaches. We work on diplomacy with the fishermen, but we also start collecting evidence so that if that approach fails, we can go straight to FDOT with evidence of traffic issues, and we can go straight to FWC with evidence of why this is a dangerous situation for divers and for the marine life.
Thoughts?
Over the last few months, the fishing controversy caught my attention, and I wanted to run some ideas past this group first, before I take ideas to the facebook group. I understand that the leaders of the movement to make BHB a no-take collection site are no longer on Scubaboard, and I am trying to make sure I understand the history fully, so that all efforts are pointed in the right direction.
I must say, it is incredibly impressive how the diving community came together to protect the diversity of the BHB. I am hoping that we can now come together (maybe even with the fishermen) to protect each other, and to protect this gem of a site.
When I first dove (pun intended) into this topic, I was 100% on board with fighting as hard as possible to protect the park, and make it a marine sanctuary. When I was reading all of the different perspectives I could find, though, I can see points from all sides of this issue. For the safety of divers, Dan Volker made a great point many years ago:
I know what you mean...but I think it was something else......I think the idea that "divers" are pushing for a "sancturay" sent a message to fisherman and boaters and to others that we did not intend.....I think they suddenly became afraid that our "goal" or the ultimate result of a successful action on out part, would be the elimination of fishing at the bridge, and for the boaters, it would mean major navigational problems that could be a nightmare for some.
I think it is imporatant that we make very clear we are NOT desiring to restrict fishing at the park---for one thing, the species we are concerned with in this juvenile nursery, the tropicals and very rare marine life, are NOT effected by fishing--they are not hooked ( maybe one accident in 6 months--certainly no amount of accidental catch volume to justify removing the fisherman).
As a group, we need to realize this is Riviera Beach..this is "their" area....the locals have been fishing the bridge for many generations, and if we attempt to hurt this enjoyment and lifestyle, we will create a horrific battle in which even if we won, we would lose in the long run.
The reality is that we need the local fisherman, and the local families as allies. This is crucial.
We need the park to be a friendly family place, and one where the criminal element does not feel welcome in ( and are immediately reported on if they show up). We need the fisherman for this, especially as the County Sherifs are no longer patrolling the park, and the entire job is now left to the Riviera Beach police force. These guys are spread too thin, and we will not have the constant presence of past years--so we need a "Neighborhood Watch" kind of Plan B. Again, we desparately need the fisherman to see us as part of their family.
This quote right here really shifted my thinking on this subject.
It is SO easy to get caught up in the tribalism that seems pervasive throughout all aspects of our society. We see it every day, but I really hope we can figure out a way to come together on this issue. I believe most everyone truly wants the same thing, we just need to figure out how to get there.
The divers' stories lately are awful. I am sure we can all sympathize with every diver who has gotten hooked or netted there. The abhorrent behaviors of a few puts lives at risk, and this needs to be addressed.
On the other hand, we've got the fishermen. It is interesting reading the comments on Dr. Botel's facebook post, because it gives us a lot of insight into what the fishing community is thinking. Part of the problem is ignorance. I don't mean that in the ugly way, but the literal definition. They do not know better. I'll list the things that I've found that they don't know:
They don't know the significance of this dive site for divers and for our marine ecosystem in general.
They don't understand that divers cannot see a line or hook in the water, typically until it is too late.
They don't understand that "hooking" a diver can literally kill them.
Some of them actually believe that divers get hooked on purpose just to spite them.
They don't even understand that we are only diving once a day (except for the night dives.)
Divers on the other hand look at the fishermen and see a few things: we see the lines and hooks and sinkers on the ocean floor, entangling our beloved critters. We see fish hooked through their bodies, dying. A moray eel swimming with a weight dragging behind it. We see our friends and loved ones being put at risk, sometimes intentionally, sometimes accidentally. And we cannot understand why in the world they can't just fish of the fishing pier in the park. (And it seems to be a prevalent theory that the fishermen only want to fish from the bridge so they can drink alcohol. Fishermen say they want to fish there because parking the park is ridiculous. Which, to be fair, is 100% true. At least we can agree on one thing!)
I believe a couple of things happened this year, and someone correct me if I'm wrong. There were some rare instances of divers getting hooked, especially on night dives. Someone reached out to FDOT and got a sympathetic ear. FDOT put up signs on Feb 22nd with "no fishing" on the East side of the BHB. The fishermen still had access to fishing at the park, but just from the old bridge fishing pier. Fishermen threw a fit. Dr. Julia Botel, Riviera Beach got involved. She made a call to FDOT, who pulled the signs down, stating that they did not go through the proper process. She started a dialogue between fishermen and divers, and was supposed to be working on a solution. Unfortunately, this all happened to be around election time, and once she was re-elected, suddenly, it was much less urgent. I don't think she's made a public statement on the issue since her re-election.
Since the signs went up and came back down, the fishermen became a dangerous combination of reckless and spiteful. They have started intentionally hooking divers much more often, much more brazenly, and fully unapologetic. Divers have been netted and screamed at, intentionally. It's an ugly situation.
I think there are a few different ways to proceed forward, and it each comes with its own drawbacks.
The first option is for the diving community to aggressively court the fishermen, offering up an olive branch, offering up education, and trying really damn hard to negotiate some peace terms.
The next option would be going back to FDOT. Now that situation is very interesting. I talked to the comms director for FDOT, and he pleaded ignorance on the entire ordeal. It struck me as very odd. But he did say that FDOT will NOT take sides in something like this. They will only get involved if it can be established that fishing from the bridge is in some way impeding traffic, be it pedestrian, cyclists, or autos. If, for example, line and hooks is left on the bridge. If fish remains are left on the bridge. If casting is also hooking pedestrians or cyclists, then they will put signs up. This is likely the most rapid remedy, because divers have already been collecting evidence of exactly this, and I'm fully confident that if I put out a request for more evidence, it will be easy to get. I may go ahead and ask for evidence of this as a "just in case" in the event that other ideas do not work.
And the nuclear option would be to push again for FWC (possibly in partnership with PBC?) to be designated as a marine sanctuary with no rec fishing allowed at all. This has been discussed fairly extensively, but the risks of asking for regulations of that sort are that we regulate ourselves out of a dive site. The flilp side of that coin, though, is this: if we were to get sanctuary designation, could we have a "tag" system similar to Bonaire, in which divers pay, say $25 a year to dive in the marine park? This would address some of the funding issues that have been brought up frequently.
One thing that confounds me is this: The park is a county park, not a city park. So why is the city council even involved with the fishing discussion? Why was Dr. Botel under the impression that FDOT needed her permission to do something that was 100% within their purview to do. Only FDOT has a say in whether fishing is allowed from an FDOT bridge. I snagged this picture from one of the other discussions on this topic.
Anyways, my thought is: we tackle all three approaches. We work on diplomacy with the fishermen, but we also start collecting evidence so that if that approach fails, we can go straight to FDOT with evidence of traffic issues, and we can go straight to FWC with evidence of why this is a dangerous situation for divers and for the marine life.
Thoughts?