Dive boat operators face charges of illegally feeding sharks in state waters

[The Chairman]

Interesting that the majority of the spearos, who used to be Randy's primary trade, are so opposed to this and happy that it might be shut down.

Threads like this, that are overbearingly one sided, don't invite themselves to contrary opinions. People would be afraid of being lynched! How this actually affects Randy's business is yet to be seen. What's worse than a lot of negative publicity?

Spoiler

=> No publicity at all! <=

 

[tropicalson]

Thanks for that link, Dan. Some of those posts are hysterical! Did not know spearboard was such a free-wheeling site, everything from Socrates and Plato to references to a**-hats!

Interesting that the majority of the spearos, who used to be Randy's primary trade, are so opposed to this and happy that it might be shut down.

I was surprised to read many of the spearos responses too but they also bring up the interesting point that Randy's shark feeding activities , legal or illegal, may be the foundation for a future shark-bite lawsuit. Who knows. Oh wait, I know, karma knows.

a**-hats --- I love it!

 

[guyharrisonphoto]

Threads like this, that are overbearingly one sided, don't invite themselves to contrary opinions. People would be afraid of being lynched! How this actually affects Randy's business is yet to be seen. What's worse than a lot of negative publicity?

Spoiler

=> No publicity at all! <=

You are right, the debate was more spirited on spearboard. Still, I don't see it likely that any of the spearos will be signing up for his shark feeds. But the "outlaw" diver crowd will be lining up in droves. The thrill of the sharks and the thrill of the high-speed chase by the cops, all in one morning!

As for publicity, you've got that right!

"If you don't get bit, you must acquit!"

 

[drrich2]

What I'd like to know, but don't think is known, is whether the behavioral effects of shark feeding (e.g.: approaching, perhaps at times accosting, divers) tend to be confined to the region where they've been fed, or extend far afield.

The point was made that many sharks are wanderers; in theory, a large reef or bull shark habituated to human handouts at one site over a few weeks might wander off down to Key Largo's Molasses Reef later, and accost an student taking an OW course.

That could be bad.

But is that likely to happen? I wonder to what extent sharks associate 'easy food' not only with divers, but other aspects of the situation, such as location, visible spear guns, a container with fish parts, etc...?

Reminds me of the threads where people talk about moray eels coming up to divers, presumably hoping for lionfish handouts. I'm concerned I may one day have a big green moray get in my space and catch me by surprise. I like those guys, but at about a 3 to 4 foot distance.

Richard.

 

[blauvelt]

Read the thread and just knew this would come up. "these are beautiful creatures and not the monsters from Jaws"

There is no excuse for feeding sharks illegally.

 

[HalcyonDaze]

Thanks for that link, Dan. Some of those posts are hysterical! Did not know spearboard was such a free-wheeling site, everything from Socrates and Plato to references to a**-hats!

Interesting that the majority of the spearos, who used to be Randy's primary trade, are so opposed to this and happy that it might be shut down.

Hysterical perhaps in the original definition of the term. I was directed to Spearboard once after engaging in a similar thread regarding Randy's operations and I fear my brain may not recover. Tony Grogan was about the only poster making a coherent argument that time around; everyone else (both the majority of anti-feeding posters and the minority defending Randy) tended to remind me of a bunch of middle school kids in a pissing contest, except with more obscenities and worse spelling.

I've been out on the Emerald for a few feeding trips in the past year - four, to be exact, numbering 11 dives total. We had multiple sharks turn up on six of those dives. I went on them precisely because I got to see shark species and numbers of sharks that I had not yet encountered - to date his trips are my first and only sandbar, silky, and scalloped hammerhead sightings along with more bulls, lemons, and duskies than the rest of my dive career put together. Last Sunday I was out there hoping to spot some of the tigers and great hammerheads. Funny; we did two dives off the back of the Esso Bonaire laying out bait and nothing came in except for six goliath groupers. Guess they don't automatically turn up when divers enter the area, let alone ring the dinner bell loud and hard. I believe Randy said a few bull sharks turned up on the perimeter towards the end of our second dive, but they never came in or followed us and the fish back up to the boat.

Personally? I still consider myself on the fence regarding this issue. I still haven't seen good hard evidence that it's changing their behavior; personally I'll call BS on the idea that the reef sharks on certain sites have gotten more aggressive in the past year. I've seen them get plenty frisky with spearfishers when I first started diving Shark Canyon and Juno back in 2006. It doesn't help that I see a number of arguments against feeding contradict themselves. Or (largely in the case of the Spearboard posts) devolve into a "shoot all the sharks" argument. Or that some of the people involved have, shall we say, conflicts of interest outside of safety concerns. With that said, I don't rule out that it could hypothetically change their behavior; however I'm not going to grab a torch and pitchfork without some hard evidence that it's a problem. I'm far less concerned with the whole "conditioning" argument than the impression I've gotten from following the YouTube videos that Randy has gotten more and more brazen in the past few months about interacting with the sharks; I've seen multiple clips since January where he comes uncomfortably close to getting bitten. That I think is something he should rein in and it has me wary of going out on the Emerald; not because I'm concerned about conditioning but because if you push things too far with a wild predator they may do something unexpected.

All that said, I agree with earlier posts - FWC has a case against these four individuals and under the law they have to be prosecuted. No ifs, ands, or buts. How it will stand up in court is up to the legal system and the evidence FWC has.

 

[mscott556]

Let's not lose sight of this. Regardless of how many feet he was away from being legal, HE VIOLATED THE LAW, a law which keeps us divers safer and is in the long-term best interest of the sharks.

Please get your facts straight. The law doesn't have the best interest for sharks or divers in mind but was put in place due to pressure from special interest groups (2002). These dive boats have raised the level of shark awareness and have brought many more people to the shark's side.

 

[DelrayDM]

Because I have zero knowledge of boating captaining rules / regulations, this forum subject has me asking questions. I did not know there are differences in "federal water" and "state water".

I have never thought, when getting on a 'dive boat', about if the boat would be in federal or Florida state water.

• When I sign liability waivers, does it make a difference if the boat will be in federal water / state?
• Do boat-for-hire operators have different training / licensing requirements in federal water than Florida state?
• Are there different requirements for boat / safety equipment when in federal water versus state?
• Is boat insurance a legal requirement in either state water or federal water?
• When a boat buys insurance, could an insurance policy only cover while in state waters or would it be good everywhere within U.S.A.?

 

[Wookie]

Because I have zero knowledge of boating captaining rules / regulations, this forum subject has me asking questions. I did not know there are differences in "federal water" and "state water".

I have never thought, when getting on a 'dive boat', about if the boat would be in federal or Florida state water.

• When I sign liability waivers, does it make a difference if the boat will be in federal water / state?
• Do boat-for-hire operators have different training / licensing requirements in federal water than Florida state?
• Are there different requirements for boat / safety equipment when in federal water versus state?
• Is boat insurance a legal requirement in either state water or federal water?
• When a boat buys insurance, could an insurance policy only cover while in state waters or would it be good everywhere within U.S.A.?

1. What matters is if you file your lawsuit in federal court or state court. If you are in State waters and file in Federal court, you may have to re-file.
2. The USCG has primacy for vessel safety on all navigable waters of the US. All operators and Masters are issued MMDs (licenses) by the USCG. There are very few exceptions, that might be a land locked lake which has no outlets or inlets. If there is water flowing in or out, it is considered navigable. Operators operate uninspected passenger vessels, limited to 6 or fewer passengers. Masters Captain inspected passenger vessels, allowed to carry more than 6 passengers.
3. No
4. No
5. Not likely. It would likely be good anywhere the vessel is legally permitted to go.

You are asking the wrong questions. The only difference between State and Federal waters is who makes the rules regarding fishing and taxes. Boats are a funny animal because they are portable. In Texas, I didn't have to have a state registration, because I didn't operate in State waters, which is 9 miles out, based on some obscure French law about how far a league is. I went through State waters on my way to federal waters. Florida charges state tax on dive charters but not fishing charters. Texas doesn't charge for either. If you buy a spot on my boat, you buy it in Texas. No tax. I buy my fuel in Florida, but I have to sign an affidavit that I will leave state waters and burn it in Federal waters. There are numerous kinds of boat insurance. They cover hull (comp for cars), P&I or Protection and Indemnity (Like liability for cars), Commercial general liability (business insurance), In Water Liability (covers the divers while in the water. I pay $25k per year for this, it's the biggie), Jones Act (Workman's comp for crew), Slips, trips and falls (on the dock, the P&I covers it on the boat), Acts of Terrorism, mortgage insurance (just like your house), water pollution (in case we spill), grounding (in case we bump), and alcohol service (in case I give you a beer and you kill someone). That's what professional boats have. My coverage is in effect anywhere on the planet I am legally. That doesn't include Cuba, North Korea, Iran, or greater than 200 miles from land with passengers onboard.

If you come diving with me and a shark bites you, your tough luck. If I were doing anything to stir up the sharks and a jury agreed with you, my insurance company would defend me on my in water liability policy. The State of Florida nor the United States Government require any dive boat to have this policy. Very few do, it's mostly for professional dive boats. Did you get what I just said there? Other dive boats think that their divemaster insurance will provide sufficient coverage, which it will to the divemaster, but not to the boat.

A couple of years ago there was a diver fatality on the Doria. The widow sued everyone and their brother. The dive boat had no in-water liability policy. There was no money to defend the boat, so the boat (boats are treated like people in court) didn't respond to the lawsuit. There was a summary judgement against the boat, but the boat had no assets, so the widow couldn't collect anything from the boat. Having no money is a defense in court...

 

[drrich2]

Another poster's link to a thread on a spear fishing forum got me thinking. If I were a spear fisherman (never been), I'd be a lot more concerned about shark feeding. When I 1st started out on this forum, I noticed that many divers never or hardly ever see a shark, but spear fishermen see them pretty often, and sometimes have to give up or fight over a catch. I've joked that divers who want to see sharks ought to take up spear fishing.

If I understand correctly, some spear fishermen nail a fish, and put it on a stringer. Others send it up on a float. But regardless, I'd think the assumption is that the odds of a shark being attracted to your area, and making a move on your catch before you get out of the water with it, is fairly low. And once in awhile, you get 'shark mugged' as part of the price of your hobby.

But if sharks associate humans with food enough to be drawn to the vicinity of boats by the sound of engines, then watch from a distance to see whether the humans might offer food, and spear fishermen start shooting things, then the odds of a given spear fisherman getting accosted by sharks would be much higher.

I wonder how much added hassle the spearo's are getting these days off the east coast of Florida?

Richard.