Shell Collecting ...again

[TMHeimer]

This is not a troll to revive old arguements. I want to hear from divers who have knowledge of shell populations. To review, here are my points:
1. Divers portray that they know everything about sharks' problems and lots about fish, nudis, etc., but almost never say anything here on SB or in dive magazines about shells. Ei.- they're not a big attraction.
2. I have found 8 Ops in the Caribbean that condone shell collecting out of hundreds in a search of about 5 years. They may be concerned with less molluscs on the reefs they take customers to. The further North you go, particularly up the U.S. East coast and into Canada, they and divers don't seem to care. Is it because there are fewer divers, the shells up North are less attractive and it doesn't affect the bottom line monetarily?
Shouldn't it be the same in the North?
3. Divers seem to follow PADI's no touch law, yet many don't use snorkels...
4. My knowledge of endangered species: Queen Conchs (Strombus Gigas) illegal to take into the US (even a 10 year old dead encrusted shell). Overfishing for food (conch fritters) the cause. Also using them to build breakwaters and roads in the Dominican. There is a conch farm in The Bahamas and now one in the Keys, I believe.
Florida Horse Conch getting rarer, as they are, I believe the 3rd biggest univalve and in demand in shell shops. Tritons Trumpets (Pacific and Atlantic) also dropping in numbers due to commercial collection. The Pacific version kills Crown of Thorns Starfish, so collecting those is regulated. I have cited one study by F. Lorenz claiming that even commercial collecting of shells has virtually no impact on mollusc populations, let alone true shell collectors collecting for themselves. That is the limit of my knowledge. But I should mention that my 42 year old shell collection probably has far less specimens that any shell shop in Florida.
5. It's OK to kill Lionfish.

The reason I got into diving was to collect shells- dead, alive, whatever--and diving gets me to the best ones. I've had a collection since 1969. I would like to hear from divers (or anyone) with knowledge of endangered molluscs. As I said, it's not a troll. I just want to hear from anyone who has data to back up saying that my collecting is wrong.

 

[Garrobo]

OK. It's wrong.

 

[TMHeimer]

OK. It's wrong.

No explanation? Or data as requested? It's just wrong? Thus my request from divers who know more than I. OK It's wrong. Look at the next post. I don't want to Beavis.. huh..huh...huh...

 

[g1138]

Looking specifically at the topic of our last argument, I couldn't find enough data during a short google search.
Specifically I would like to know how long it takes for the animal in question to reach sexual maturity, what the survival rate is for the next generation etc etc.

I would advise against taking an animal that takes a long time to reach sexual maturity, has a low offspring count (that reaches sexual maturity), and isn't in great numbers. Generally takes of that specific type of animal result in the mature adults being removed, leaving only the immature juveniles. This creates a gap in the generations and lowers the next output of offspring each year.

The general consensus, behind the leave no trace policy of scuba, is to leave the ocean environment and it's critters as is so it can be enjoyed by others in the future.

We're basically at a impasse at here as to whether taking live shellfish has a negative impact on the population and a correlating negative impact on the environment. If there's a report out there it probably cost a fee to purchase or is housed in a university archive.


For what's it worth here's what I did find.
http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/download/S14RD16 QConch Allee effect Stoner 2000.pdf?id=DOCUMENT
The article states that "conch populations in most nations are at or near densities where Allee's effects present a serious obstacle to stock recovery" [Page 5; 3rd paragraph]
Meaning that even if human interacting were to cease, conch populations would have much trouble recovering due to natural causes of population suppression such as predation, disease, individual reproductive failure etc.

Allee's Effect is a theory that states for small populations, the rates of survival and reproductive success is benefited by increases in population density.
By removing live individuals (ie. shell collecting, fishing, harvesting etc) you're lowering the population density.

So how this applies to your shell collecting depends on what species you're planning on taking and whether you're taking a live organism.

All other articles I found were based on intertidal takes where the general public is involved. I didn't think it really applied to the question you posed.


Overall there simply isn't enough data on marine gastropods in general for several reasons.
- Sexing an individual w/o physical/harmful intrusion is impossible, therefore population studies in lab settings is less controlled and complex compared to other studies on different animals.
- There is a large number of gastropods species worldwide and generally the pretty shelled ones are less abundant compared to the ugly ones. This coupled with the above makes it hard to do a life cycle or population study.
etc. etc.

Take it as it is, I don't think either of us can prove whether it has an impact or not.
I do hope however, that you're giving an accurate explanation as to why you're shell collecting now.

 

[endurodog]

IMHO the overall dive community is green to the point of fault, in general they are against the harvesting of anything. Being a hunter I understand that there are some species that can be harvested and some that should not. I don't know enough about the specifics of shells to give an opinion beyond look into it, if it's legal and there is not a "real" negative impact, then go for it.

 

[TMHeimer]

g1138, Thanks for yout input. Maturity is something well-discussed on the Shell Forums re-conservation.
There are a lot of questions--your link says Queen Conch are no longer endangered. Yes, you're right about whether personal shell collecting has any impact. The "pretty ones" may be very more abundant than the "ugly ones" because we're looking at popular dive sites down there. The "ugly ones" just do their thing without anyone bothering them. "Hard to prove"--yes. I collect shells now because that is my passion (why do you ask why I collect shells NOW, as opposed to 1988?) . Interesting--you said: "at an impasse here as to whether taking live shellfish has a negative impact on the population and a correlating negative impact on the environment". Hmm..who knows, thus my question.

endurodog, Also thanks for your input. I assume you are a spearo and kill to eat. I poke spear flounders for that reason. I used to think eating what you kill made it OK. But if you took 1/2 of all the fish commercially caught in nets/trawling/bottom scraping/long lines since 1980, dumped them in a pit in Kansas and let the rest live we'd be in GREAT shape.

 

[DivemasterDennis]

I know a lot of people who collect shells that wash up on shore and have never heard anyone castigate them for their collecting. I think that retrieving the shells of dead animals from beneath the surface is not much different. Harvesting living animals to add their shells to a collection strikes me as a different matter. Over harvesting of any species can lead to an imbalance in the ecosystem, the endangering of a species or several species, and that is not something I care to be a part of. I wonder if every diver felt it was ok for them to harvest a flamigo tongue or two for the pretty shells, or to collect a triton or two, and especially those really cool nautilus so they could add a fresh vibrant shell to their collection, what the impact would be on those forms of marine life. Whatever you choose to do, please do it responsibly. One way to determine the propriety of your actions is to consider the impact if everyone did the same.
DivemasterDennis

 

[seaducer]

1. Divers portray that they know everything about sharks' problems and lots about fish, nudis, etc., but almost never say anything here on SB or in dive magazines about shells. Ei.- they're not a big attraction.

Sharks and fish are often much more prevalent than shells worth talking about. Not too mention the "macho" factor. To most people sharks and fish are much more interesting to discuss than shells, but trends in diver conversation don't mean much in the grand scheme of things. Same thing with nudibranchs. Many are more photogenic than most of the shells you are likely to see. Kind of like the hot person on a beach gets more looks and attention than the ordinary person. I am not sure what you are getting at with this "point"?

2. I have found 8 Ops in the Caribbean that condone shell collecting out of hundreds in a search of about 5 years. They may be concerned with less molluscs on the reefs they take customers to. The further North you go, particularly up the U.S. East coast and into Canada, they and divers don't seem to care. Is it because there are fewer divers, the shells up North are less attractive and it doesn't affect the bottom line monetarily?
Shouldn't it be the same in the North?

I have been asked at Caribbean dive ops if I would be interested in partaking of the local brothel a time or two as well. I wouldn't base anything on what you can find dive ops in poor countries willing to do. That being said, your second question is a resounding no. You should not expect the same treatment at all locations. About anything dive related really, but specifically shell collecting. Some species and in some locations there is such an abundance that you could fill dive bags all day and not make a dent. Other species or in other locations conditions may be vastly different. The live specimen of whatever species you collected today may be the first live specimen seen in those waters in some time.

3. Divers seem to follow PADI's no touch law, yet many don't use snorkels...

Hmm, I am not being deliberately argumentative here, but with your other points thus far, I don't see where this makes any sense given the subject matter? There are lots of PADI recomendations that are followed or ignored by lots of PADI divers. And then there are those...others...who don't have a PADI card. Even in the DIR camp not everyone considers those teachings to be a holistic approach to diving and apply the lessons and skills they seem to feel accents their own diving and discard the rest. How does this relate to harvesting a natural resource?

4. My knowledge of endangered species: Queen Conchs (Strombus Gigas) illegal to take into the US (even a 10 year old dead encrusted shell). Overfishing for food (conch fritters) the cause. Also using them to build breakwaters and roads in the Dominican. There is a conch farm in The Bahamas and now one in the Keys, I believe.
Florida Horse Conch getting rarer, as they are, I believe the 3rd biggest univalve and in demand in shell shops. Tritons Trumpets (Pacific and Atlantic) also dropping in numbers due to commercial collection. The Pacific version kills Crown of Thorns Starfish, so collecting those is regulated. I have cited one study by F. Lorenz claiming that even commercial collecting of shells has virtually no impact on mollusc populations, let alone true shell collectors collecting for themselves. That is the limit of my knowledge. But I should mention that my 42 year old shell collection probably has far less specimens that any shell shop in Florida.

Recreational use is rarely the only influence on a natural resource, but one P.O.V. I found consistent is that recreational users often compare themselves to whatever commercial operation in relevant, and then make a claim about how the businesses are allowed to legally rape and pillage while the individual, who would take just one or two, is punished, and how that is absurd.

The problem, as I try to explain to recreational fisherman in NJ who complain that commercial boats take more than they do is that there are few boats legally operating in NJ waters compared to the millions (literally) of recreational fisherman pressuring the same resource. Combined the recreational fisherman have a significant impact on fish populations and based on sheer numbers and thousands of square miles to be patrolled nearly impossible to manage. As opposed to the very small number of docks and canneries that commercial boats can sell their catch to. So don't just think about the number of live animals harvested for your personal collection, but how many divers may be collecting in that same area over the years and what impact that whole number may have. Then you can compare to commercial harvesters.

At any rate, you still need to apply specific species and location information when deciding if your activity is harmful to that environment or not, as it relates to all other activities in that area.

5. It's OK to kill Lionfish.

Sure, in waters where lionfish are ferral it is fine to do so. In fact it is fine for divers or recreational fisherman to harvest a great many species. Here in NJ it would be A OK for you to collect several species of clams, provided you have a permit and meet other regulations. Oysters and mussels too. Most snails and we have some nifty ones from time to time.

The reason I got into diving was to collect shells- dead, alive, whatever--and diving gets me to the best ones. I've had a collection since 1969. I would like to hear from divers (or anyone) with knowledge of endangered molluscs. As I said, it's not a troll. I just want to hear from anyone who has data to back up saying that my collecting is wrong.

I should think taking discarded shells would have a minimal impact on the environment, but harvesting live animals may or may not be very hard on the population. Again we would need specific species and specific locations. And keep in mind the study you seek may not have been done, but that in itself does not validate irresponsible actions.

I would say if in the location you are at, there is an abundance of animals and little pressure harvest away. If on the other hand you have dived X location dozens of times or more and you have never seen X snail, or rarely ever see X snail, then leave the one you just found alone.

Just follow the law, when in doubt seek the advice of a local naturalist, and use common sense on your dives. If you are collecting endangered species then you are wrong, and it really is that simple. If you are not then you might need to look a little further to ensure you are not harming the animals you are diving to enjoy.

Unless you have no concsience or moral compass, in which case do whatever you want. But then I suspect you wouldn't be here looking for whatever it is you are looking for. Cause you wouldn't care.

As far as people picking on you because of your hobby. Well there are lots of internet experts out there. But there are also a lot of people who are irresponsible and need to be "woken up". Not sure who is who in this conversation...

 

[TMHeimer]

DM Dennis, Thanks. You must consider however that it has been my experience that most divers have little interest in shells at all, and collecting live ones in today's day and age is taboo.

seaducer, Thanks. A lot of good input. And you're probably right (?) in that there are probably no studies done regarding specific species. Of course, my thread is the usual rant of mine, but I will respond to your points:

1. Divers and sharks/nudis: Everyone cares about the plight of the shark. Nobody gives a thought about shells in any way. You kill a fly in the house that's OK. Boiling a "slug" out of a shell is not. To me, that is the average diver's perspective.
2. Regarding dive ops and northern vs. southern locales. Point taken and I agree. But out of the hundreds of places I've contacted many are from poor countries, but many are not.
3. Fishing. Again, we need stastistics. Having grown up in NY, I know NJ is big on fishing. Having "snowbirded" on the FL panhandle for years and taken fishing charters and done shore fishing, I wonder--- New rule ('08?) commercial boats' DAILY(?) limit reduced from 10,000 pounds to 8,000 pounds. Red snapper recreational limit reduced from 2 to 1. Hard to relate to that. I have no stats, but I have always had a gut feeling that all the shore casters and individual boaters (even maybe in NJ?) don't add up to one commercial trawler. I could be wrong.
4. PADI and snorkels: This was a personal experience in Panama. A PADI Rescue Diver on our boat was saying that PADI SAYS don't take anything or touch anything. I told him PADI also says always wear a snorkel and he wasn't. I thought of it being just an example of people blindly following ehat the "norm" is. Of course, I was a bit pissed off, as usual....
5. Your final point: Yeah, I suppose you're right in that there just haven't been any studies done regarding specific species. Too bad. Why not? Anyway, thanks for good input.