BHB on Undercurrent

[Pipehorse]

Thanks for your input. The question was not directed at you.

I thought it was just general give and take dialog? Otherwise what's the point of it being a forum? BTW, I don't recall asking you to correct my incorrect spelling 20 or 30 post ago, but thanks for "your" input anyway.

 

[tursiops]

I thought it was just general give and take dialog? Otherwise what's the point of it being a forum?

I'm waiting to respond to see if anyone else answers, to test your suggestion that it is just general give and take.

BTW, I don't recall asking you to correct my incorrect spelling 20 or 30 post ago, but thanks for "your" input anyway.

I took down that post almost immediately, since it was wrong. I'm happy to admit mistakes.

 

[Pipehorse]

I'm waiting to respond to see if anyone else answers, to test your suggestion that it is just general give and take.

Without rancor, sarcasm, or being facetious, I didn't suggest, I asked it as a question. Again without rancor, so if you quote what somebody writes, and ask a question you are only intending the person quoted to answer? But its on a public message board that everybody can see? So for example if another individual besides you answers me right now, I am not going to write back and tell that individual the question wasn't intended for them because its on a public board. If you want only one person to answer a question wouldn't you just send a personal message? I clicked below your icon, where its say 11,186 posts. I read quite a few them. It seems to me many of your posting are not in reply to a solicitation to you. Seriously I am not trying to bust your chops, I am just perplexed by the logic of it.

I took down that post almost immediately, since it was wrong. I'm happy to admit mistakes.

When you posted it, actually I chuckled and almost responded, "rite!". I didn't take offense at it until you chided me for answering the question you posed, that I thought was for general dialog, than it seemed hypocritical, again saying this without rancor. Thank you for admitting you were wrong. That doesn't seem to happen here very much. I apologized to two individuals here, neither acknowledged the apology. Or apologized in kind. In my observation there is a lot doubling down on arguments that lack merit with respect to logic or reason (I don't mean you) on this board.

I feel pretty strongly about this. Trying to snag me with a fishing hook is attempted murder. Coexistence of divers and fisherpeople with malice in mind is not possible. The two need to be separated in space or time, preferably. For example, most of the divers are there at HT +/- 1 hour. Let the fisherpeople have the rest of the day, but NOT during that time. Put them on the old bridge, even the

And since I have you here let me ask another question if you don't mind. If the fisherpeople were limited to HT +/- 1 hour, wouldn't LE have to enforce that? So if LE has to be there to enforce this 2 hour window, why can't LE be there during the same window to prevent somebody from "attempted murder"?

FWC officers arrest individuals for poaching of alligators, deer, hog, and other creatures on land. They arrest and ticket individuals for outright poaching of fish, lobsters and crabs, or exceeding catch limits, or for keeping shorts all the time, its what they do. They are good at their jobs, and they are good at sussing out individuals that are up to no good. Any FWC officer worth his salt would be able to recognize an individual trying to snag divers as opposed to actually fishing in an instant. If FWC checked licenses on the bridge two or three times a week at high tide for a month, do you think the malicious fisherperson is going to continue showing up for trying to snag divers? If somebody else besides you wants to answer that's fine, or not, its all good.

 

[tursiops]

And since I have you here let me ask another question if you don't mind. If the fisherpeople were limited to HT +/- 1 hour, wouldn't LE have to enforce that? So if LE has to be there to enforce this 2 hour window, why can't LE be there during the same window to prevent somebody from "attempted murder"?

I can't answer any questions about Florida law enforcement, or Florida laws or politics in general. They seem quite bizarre. Someone who lives there and votes there may have more information. Elsewhere in this thread someone said the HT +/- 1h window would not work because it changed every day. Uhhh, right.

 

[Pipehorse]

I can't answer any questions about Florida law enforcement, or Florida laws or politics in general. They seem quite bizarre. Someone who lives there and votes there may have more information. Elsewhere in this thread someone said the HT +/- 1h window would not work because it changed every day. Uhhh, right.

Have you been diving at BHB?

 

[tursiops]

Have you been diving at BHB?

Yes. Numerous times.

 

[homerdoc]

Didnt read from the last page I posted to here.....but my wife and I dove the blue heron bridge today. I would say divers were the minority and it was wonderful to see all the folks using the park.

We saw an Easter mass, 5 baptisms, several big fish (2-3 lbs)brought in.

Then had a dive that had really bad vis, but outside a cinderblock a juvenile drum was going to take me out. It was so cool.

In reflection, I am against making that place where people cant fish. All the fishermen were respectful and to see the dads teaching their kids was really cool. If I hadn't read this thread I wouldnt have noticed.

 

[tekkydiver]

Okay, I'll bite.


How is looking at fish, taking pictures of fish, etc., "harassing fishers"? (there is one response I expect, just waiting)

379.105 Harassment of hunters, trappers, or fishers.—

(b) Attempt to disturb fish, game, or nongame animals or attempt to affect their behavior with the intent to prevent their lawful taking by another.

See (b) in your post. And don't think the FWC wouldn't put a diver in the water to keep an eye out. A big chunk of their operating budget comes from fees generated by Fishing and Hunting License purchases..

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

Okay, I'll bite.


379.105 Harassment of hunters, trappers, or fishers.—
(1) A person may not intentionally, within a publicly or privately owned wildlife management or fish management area or on any state-owned water body:
(a) Interfere with or attempt to prevent the lawful taking of fish, game, or nongame animals by another.
(b) Attempt to disturb fish, game, or nongame animals or attempt to affect their behavior with the intent to prevent their lawful taking by another.
(2) Any person who violates this section commits a Level Two violation under s. 379.401.

How is looking at fish, taking pictures of fish, etc., "harassing fishers"? (there is one response I expect, just waiting)

See (b) in your post. And don't think the FWC wouldn't put a diver in the water to keep an eye out. A big chunk of their operating budget comes from fees generated by Fishing and Hunting License purchases..

I'm afraid I'm not following. If a diver is swimming around, looking at fish, maybe taking pictures. How is that a violation of:

(b) Attempt to disturb fish, game, or nongame animals or attempt to affect their behavior with the intent to prevent their lawful taking by another.

Surely you are not implying that divers seeing fishing hooks/line are going to try to scare the fish away to "save" the fish? Only idiots would interfere with that and risk getting hooked. I don't care if someone was fishing for an endangered species, I'm going the opposite direction. I've never been hooked by a fish hook, but I have had my body pierced by nails, and I can tell you, it isn't fun. I'd imagine a fish hook would be even worse when getting reeled in.

So I'm curious how you think divers would be guilty of (b).

 

[tursiops]

Julia Botel's response to my email about BHB and fishing/diving:

Good morning,

Please note, we are in receipt of your email.

As this is a current and pressing matter, staff in collaboration with several other government agencies/entities are currently looking into identifying compromises/solutions for both divers and anglers.

In the near future, we will update both groups on the progress of a solution to this matter.

Thanks,

Julie Botel, Ed. D.
City Council Chairperson
Riviera Beach City Council, District 4
City of Riviera Beach
600 W. Blue Heron Blvd.
Riviera Beach, FL 33404
Cell: 561.762.5760
Office: 561.845.3683
JBotel@rivierabeach.org
www.rivierabeach.org
Facebook: Councilperson Dr. Julia Botel​