Can we take things from the ocean?

[doctormike]

- 95% of the crap people bring up from wrecks they would pass right over at a flea market.

I think that you may be missing the point of why people collect artifacts. They are significant because you recovered them, conserved them, and care about them. They are like a physical dive log. People don't collect them because they are valuable. Nobody who has Doria china got it so that they don't have to buy a full set of dishes at Costco.

 

[ofg-1]

Sure. You can take sea lice, jellyfish tentacles, bite marks, occasional sting ray stinger, urchin spines, fire coral burns, lionfish quills, maybe a cone snail or two.

 

[Marie13]

I do have a problem with other people trying to force their morals on me or others.

So you have no problem with people looting wrecks where such actions are illegal?

Some divers around the Great Lakes would still strip wrecks here of everything if possible, even though attitudes have changed over the past 30-something years. New wrecks are being found all the time. I want to be able to dive these wrecks with their artifacts intact, not stripped to decorate someone’s den.

 

[MaxBottomtime]

 

[TMHeimer]

I haven't read any of the posts but have some answers.
Artifacts from wrecks laws vary from what I read.
Many know I collect shells.
There are about 5 places in the Caribbean (including 2 in Mexico where you do need a permit) where collecting shells, dead or alive is both legal and at least one dive op allows it.
You can collect most species in Florida, other than a couple listed on CITES. There are limits, I believe, and possibly you need a fishing license in some places.
The worldwide protected marine areas and laws prohibiting collecting are ever increasing.

 

[CuzzA]

Yeah, that's not a very reasonable question. I doubt we have thousands of spearos. Even with as many as we have, compared to indiscriminate angling, we have no bycatch we're killing.

Night diving off of Saba years ago, I saw a meek nurse shark go after a tasty morsel under a coral head. Swooooosh, the shark's tail wipes out a barrel sponge that was at least 3 or 4 feet tall. Dayum. Then he really flicks that tail and I watched him flatten the entire spot. I was truly amazed to see a nurse shark act this sharky and then I heard the crunk and a bit of blood flushed through the shark's gills. As he backed out with his prize, I was horrified to see the coral head tilt, make another crunk sound and then roll to the bottom. I still shake my head at how much that 4 ft nurse shark wreaked in pursuit of their dinner. Shheeeshhh! That single shark eclipsed all of the damage I've witnessed from poor divers since I started diving.

In my estimation, divers have a much smaller impact on the environment than pollution or any commercial activity. There might be some localized damage and we should all do our best to prevent that. The Keys are a good example of that. Lots of diving and almost all of the damages are a function of septic tanks poisoning the entire reef system.

I have seen natural predation from a nurse shark and indeed they go from cool and calm to maniacs.

The hogfish crunching up all the crabs and snails, the parrot fish eating corals, turtles eating sponges, jacks sniping cute little Nemo.

An old shell? Dead skeleton, all peanuts to the daily circle of life on the reef.

 

[Moerae]

Yeah, that's not a very reasonable question. I doubt we have thousands of spearos. Even with as many as we have, compared to indiscriminate angling, we have no bycatch we're killing.

Night diving off of Saba years ago, I saw a meek nurse shark go after a tasty morsel under a coral head. Swooooosh, the shark's tail wipes out a barrel sponge that was at least 3 or 4 feet tall. Dayum. Then he really flicks that tail and I watched him flatten the entire spot. I was truly amazed to see a nurse shark act this sharky and then I heard the crunk and a bit of blood flushed through the shark's gills. As he backed out with his prize, I was horrified to see the coral head tilt, make another crunk sound and then roll to the bottom. I still shake my head at how much that 4 ft nurse shark wreaked in pursuit of their dinner. Shheeeshhh! That single shark eclipsed all of the damage I've witnessed from poor divers since I started diving.

In my estimation, divers have a much smaller impact on the environment than pollution or any commercial activity. There might be some localized damage and we should all do our best to prevent that. The Keys are a good example of that. Lots of diving and almost all of the damages are a function of septic tanks poisoning the entire reef system.

Fair points all around.

That said, I think you made an assumption that I meant something I didn't say.

Importantly, the question isn't implying an answer, it's just a question I think divers should sincerely ask themselves. Saying lots of divers didn't have a measurable impact in a particular case (spearing, big reef) isn't a contradiction to my statement, it's an answer to the question in that specific context. The answer is "lots of divers doing this is fine".

There are scenarios in which a diver doing something small would have a different answer. A well preserved historical wreck is a case in which many divers all say "Well I'm not doing any harm taking this one thing" as they remove something can greatly diminish the wreck. In that case, I would hope divers consider the impact of a diving culture rather than just their own individual actions.

 

[lowwall]

Black Cap Basslet and Spotted Drum. I'm amazed by your brilliant humor. How ever did you think of so clever a question? I'm sure the folks at the plant relish your comments.

Ooh, blue collar shaming. How quaint.

Are you familiar with reductio ad absurdum arguments? One type, associated with Socrates, is when you take an apparently innocuous position to its logical extreme. If the extreme appears absurd (or contradictory), then logically the original position is invalid.

Your premise is that it's morally acceptable for "marine aquarists" to collect tropical fish for their own use as long as it's done with due care to the fish. I don't agree. "Marine aquarists" literally means anyone with a saltwater fishtank, there are no licensing or certification requirements for this hobby in the US. Thus, according to your premise, anyone who wanted to collect tropical fish could do so for the cost of a basic saltwater setup. You mentioned no limits on size or rarity, other than what you could reasonable care for. So whale sharks and Mantas could be on your collections list if you were rich enough.

But taking this back down to Earth, I happen to like seeing spotted drums and basslets in their native habitat. I do think it would be unsustainable if anyone who wanted to collect them from the wild was free to do so.

Note that I have nothing against private aquariums (I have a basic freshwater setup myself). But I do think they should be stocked from the offspring of already captured fish. Even taking the Gulf Stream stragglers means at best you are taking meals away from another bunch of marine organisms.

One last thing, because I know it's going to come up. Of course there are much worse abuses of the marine environment than fish collecting. But we are not talking about that here.

 

[CuzzA]

Just remember it's the marine ornamental reef keeping hobby that is the funding, the R&D and science behind reef restoration. I often laugh when the media makes some claim that scientist have done something hobbiests have been doing for decades. When humans do kill all the reefs they will be the world's coral and fish seed banks.

That said, I do agree there needs to be regulations and enforcement, especially in the Indo-Pacific. One thing I don't agree with is the notion it's a cheap hobby anyone can get into. It is one of the more expensive hobbies and the cost continues to skyrocket.

 

[agilis]

Ooh, blue collar shaming. How quaint.

Are you familiar with reductio ad absurdum arguments? One type, associated with Socrates, is when you take an apparently innocuous position to its logical extreme. If the extreme appears absurd (or contradictory), then logically the original position is invalid.

Your premise is that it's morally acceptable for "marine aquarists" to collect tropical fish for their own use as long as it's done with due care to the fish. I don't agree. "Marine aquarists" literally means anyone with a saltwater fishtank, there are no licensing or certification requirements for this hobby in the US. Thus, according to your premise, anyone who wanted to collect tropical fish could do so for the cost of a basic saltwater setup. You mentioned no limits on size or rarity, other than what you could reasonable care for. So whale sharks and Mantas could be on your collections list if you were rich enough.

But taking this back down to Earth, I happen to like seeing spotted drums and basslets in their native habitat. I do think it would be unsustainable if anyone who wanted to collect them from the wild was free to do so.

Note that I have nothing against private aquariums (I have a basic freshwater setup myself). But I do think they should be stocked from the offspring of already captured fish. Even taking the Gulf Stream stragglers means at best you are taking meals away from another bunch of marine organisms.

One last thing, because I know it's going to come up. Of course there are much worse abuses of the marine environment than fish collecting. But we are not talking about that here.

You misstate my premise. Socrates would be ashamed of you, but thanks for the explanation of reduction to the absurd. Since you raised the issue of formal argument, let me point out that yours is guilty of begging the question, a term which I assume you know means a logical flaw based on a missing element in a reasoning process and not the equivalent of 'raises the question'. Nowhere did I indicate that it's acceptable for every marine aquarist to collect their own fish. Actually, I indicated that it's quite acceptable for a highly experienced collector and aquarist like me to do so. In any case, you have no moral authority to decide what is acceptable for anyone other than yourself in these sorts of innocuous pursuits. The reef fish I and others collect are a vanishingly small number compared to the amount netted or trapped and eaten by local people. There are not that many marine aquarists in total, and only a very few of that number are divers, and even fewer still are capable of catching, maintaining, and transporting specimens.

It's actually quite amusing to be lectured to by an individual who believes that tropical strays should be left to be eaten by crabs when they perish. I assume you are opposed to cremation, since that process contributes to air pollution and deprives the earth and its bacterial and worm population the opportunity to feed on the carcass of a creature that has consumed vast quantities of nutrients during its life. I think I know a great deal more than you about issues related to size and rarity, and about ocean life in general, for that matter. Stick to what you know, however limiting that may be.