Scuba-74
Contributor
I completely agree with the second part of your statement.
Cape Cod diving
- Thread starter Steelyeyes
- Start date
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
I completely agree with the second part of your statement.
AfterDark
Contributor
By staying out of it do you mean stop the protecting seals and GWs? There are a lot of ways we interfere. The reason the GW's are there in such numbers is because we continue to protect a species, seals that no longer need protection. The proof is there in the form of an unchecked and out of control seal population of Cape Cod and resulting overpopulation of GWs.
If nature delivered a virus among the seals and they started dying off in large numbers, would you bet against a rescue mission being launched trying to save them? I wouldn't. We hardly ever allow nature to take its course, that's way too cruel for most people.
Like the person that couldn't stand watching the frigate birds pick off the baby sea turtles and saved one by placing it in the water. Well when one turtle reaches the water the others take it as a signal of safety and make a dash for the water. The frigate birds had a feast as the baby turtles ran out of the nest.
HalcyonDaze
Contributor
So ... humans running out and killing those animals is "not interfering?" You may wish to consult a dictionary or thesaurus to refine your argument. "Not interfering" would be leaving the sharks to do what they historically did, which is keep the seal population in check. If the result is too many sharks for you, dive elsewhere.
@AfterDark pretty much we dont protect the species but we also dont hunt or kill the animals we totally stay out of it. You provided a perfect example.
We protected the seals causing a huge population explosion. Increase the prey the predators will follow, we need to let nature do what what nature does and watch if we want to.
The ocean belongs to fish, whales seals sharks etc we need to remember that and start becoming observer's not meddlers.
We protected the seals causing a huge population explosion. Increase the prey the predators will follow, we need to let nature do what what nature does and watch if we want to.
The ocean belongs to fish, whales seals sharks etc we need to remember that and start becoming observer's not meddlers.
AfterDark
Contributor
Ya'll forget we are part of the eco system. We unfortunately are a species of extremes. We hunt species (seals in this case) to the brink of extinction then seeing our mistake we go full bore in the other direction to the point where shooing a marine mammal off of a boat dock is a crime. If someone kills a GW that's a crime, yet there are no shortages of GWs wherever there is food. We need a bit of moderation in our thinking and actions. At some point we need to declare victory with our efforts to save seals and lighten up a bit on the regulations.
Eventually decades from now the as GWs multiply, they will reduce the seal population of Cape Cod to the point it will not support the GW population. In that case the GWs will either move on or die. This is nature taking it's course it ain't pretty.
I watched it here with the deer population. We had mild winters during the late 80's/90's that provided the deer with an abundance of food. The population boomed to 60 deer per sq. mile, on Block Island where hunting was prohibited the deer boomed to 80 per sq mile. Then real winters returned, deer where dying everywhere, they where destroying gardens and landscape all over the state. The DEM increased the number of deer a hunter can take from 2 per year to 6 per year. After a decade the deer population is now 15 per sq mile which according to wildlife experts the ideal number for the environment here in RI. It took a lot of death to get there.
Eventually decades from now the as GWs multiply, they will reduce the seal population of Cape Cod to the point it will not support the GW population. In that case the GWs will either move on or die. This is nature taking it's course it ain't pretty.
I watched it here with the deer population. We had mild winters during the late 80's/90's that provided the deer with an abundance of food. The population boomed to 60 deer per sq. mile, on Block Island where hunting was prohibited the deer boomed to 80 per sq mile. Then real winters returned, deer where dying everywhere, they where destroying gardens and landscape all over the state. The DEM increased the number of deer a hunter can take from 2 per year to 6 per year. After a decade the deer population is now 15 per sq mile which according to wildlife experts the ideal number for the environment here in RI. It took a lot of death to get there.
HalcyonDaze
Contributor
Where your comparison with the deer population falls apart is that unlike with the seals, there are no natural predators remaining to perform that population control. Additionally, "natural" population control is where predators, food scarcity, population movement, and disease do the work. Human-driven population control typically consists of "this animal annoys me, so I will kill it whenever I interact with it." As you stated, we are a species of extremes. Open the door a bit on white sharks and every yahoo will want a jaw on his wall; open the door a bit on seals and fishermen will shoot them on sight.
@AfterDark is 100 percent correct. We created this problem we are creatures of extremes and mother nature is a real b%$^h when it comes to correcting issues.
The problem now is that the idiots in charge will not take into account equilibrium. As divers we appreciate the ecosystem and realize that affecting one affects all. The general public just wants the sharks gone. So as extreme humans we get rid of the sharks, the seal population continues to explode, they eat all the fish so then they die from starvation, without all the fish renuturing the coral it dies and we get an empty ocean.
The problem now is that the idiots in charge will not take into account equilibrium. As divers we appreciate the ecosystem and realize that affecting one affects all. The general public just wants the sharks gone. So as extreme humans we get rid of the sharks, the seal population continues to explode, they eat all the fish so then they die from starvation, without all the fish renuturing the coral it dies and we get an empty ocean.
AfterDark
Contributor
I never said GWs need to be eliminated. I do think the seal population needs to be controlled.
Being at the top of the food chain we are natural predators of every species on earth.
There are ways to control species population without the yahoos as you call them.
We do it with hundreds of species on land and sea. When I was young, for example there were no limits on the fish species called Tautog around here, that changed long ago. Size and catch numbers now apply to Tautog. The species is still recovering. Striped Bass same story although the bass are recovering faster. Why are GWs any different? Over protection has downsides, just different ones then under protection.
On Block Island all nuisance permits where denied by the DEM until hunting was allowed on the island. The lack of hunting was part of the over population problem. When managing deer population the RIDEM considers hunting the main tool.
Our culture has no use for seal products but, some cultures do. Leasing harvesting rights to other countries with strict limits and strong enforcement would control the seal population and keep the yahoos out. We have two coastlines loaded with seals.
Damselfish
Contributor
Where is my camera
Similar threads
