Diving for Scallops at the Long Beach Oil Rigs

[Ken Kurtis]

I was simply pointing out that there is no "Gentleman's Agreement" between elements of the dive community and the rigs owners. To have an agreement, there must be informed consent from each party. That does not exist.

I would argue the opposite Bill. There is certianly informed consent on the part of the diving community as the captains and even shops and clubs were involved in the decision chain when this was all being drafted. Aera Energy was certainly involved and I'd suggest that any agreements and protocols agreed upon by Aera carry forward - much as their oil lease agreements do - to the new owners.

I go back to the cause of my dismay: Why are some of you looking for a loophole so you can strip the place clean of scallops (at a rate of 10/diver/day)??????

- Ken

 

[merxlin]

My comment would also be what the "sport" is in hunting scallops there, versus the legal take areas in the open ocean? This to me is like the divers who took lobster from the dive park- it was legal (despite all the discussions of the park being protected back then) but certainly not in the best interest of all divers or the area. At least now it is officially a protected area now. The term "fish in a barrel" seems appropriate.

 

[Power Scuba]

I would argue the opposite Bill. There is certianly informed consent on the part of the diving community as the captains and even shops and clubs were involved in the decision chain when this was all being drafted. Aera Energy was certainly involved and I'd suggest that any agreements and protocols agreed upon by Aera carry forward - much as their oil lease agreements do - to the new owners.

I think your suggestion that this ethereal Gentleman's Agreement somehow carries forward to the new owners (based on its own merits?) is insupportable. As I said before, for any type of agreement to be binding/legitimate, you must have the informed consent of both parties.

I go back to the cause of my dismay: Why are some of you looking for a loophole so you can strip the place clean of scallops (at a rate of 10/diver/day)??????
- Ken

For anyone to be looking for a "loophole" there has to be some kind if substantive agreement/contract in place. I think I've shown above (and in previous comments) there is not. (Not to mention the fact I'd be thrilled to know just what percentage of shops, boat owners, and the rest of the "community" bought into someone negotiating the original "Gentleman's Agreement" on their behalf.)

I go back to my previous statement: I would suggest it (scalloping on the rigs) is a fine example of sustainable fishing in that there are literally thousands of scallops on each rig, and in all the years I've seen divers take their limit, I've never seen a diminishing of scallop numbers.

"Stripping the place clean" indeed.

Bill

 

[dytis-sm]

I think the point was lost in gentlemen s' agreements, fishing regulations, accidents etc. The "no take" agreement was supposed to protect the cleaning boats rights (am I right Ken?). Obviously it is no news to anyone that all these years some people did not care and harvested their limit. Some common sense tells me that they would have done anything in their power to stop any relevant activities. They have not and my guess is that they do not care.

One question that I cannot avoid asking is how many of the people that are scallop advocates here, are actually scallop hunters? Do you hunt Ken?

 

[Power Scuba]

My comment would also be what the "sport" is in hunting scallops there, versus the legal take areas in the open ocean? This to me is like the divers who took lobster from the dive park- it was legal (despite all the discussions of the park being protected back then) but certainly not in the best interest of all divers or the area. At least now it is officially a protected area now. The term "fish in a barrel" seems appropriate.

I would offer, Merxlin, that many divers who take scallops (or urchins, clams, etc) see it not as a "sport" at all, but rather a way to add a sustainable seafood to their family's dinner table occasionally.

There is no real "hunt" involved, unlike fishing/spearing for fish. So no, I wouldn't classify it as "sport". Your mileage may vary!

 

[merxlin]

I would offer, Merxlin, that many divers who take scallops (or urchins, clams, etc) see it not as a "sport" at all, but rather a way to add a sustainable seafood to their family's dinner table occasionally.

There is no real "hunt" involved, unlike fishing/spearing for fish. So no, I wouldn't classify it as "sport". Your mileage may vary!

Exactly my point. It's there so why not take it. No one will notice. I think that is a dangerous attitude and one that has gotten us to some very precarious positions in many environmental areas so far.

So let's say there is no "aggreement" in place. I believe the rigs do belong to someone and that the scallops are attached to that property. Whether they want to sell them, have someone that they pay harvest them, or let them all die a natural death, doesn't the life on the rigs belong to them? In it's purest form, aren't we stealing them from the rig owners? Or is everything below the waterline "fair game"?

FYI- I am not anti-hunting, and have enjoyed my fair share of locally harvested seafood. But I am a firm believer in doing what is best for us all as divers. I love diving the rigs, and would hate to lose that ability. Are we in imminent danger of doing so? Probably not. But I feel like we will not know until it is too late, and all of a sudden there will be a no dive zone around them. Better safe than sorry.

Some common sense tells me that they would have done anything in their power to stop any relevant activities. They have not and my guess is that they do not care.

That could also just be wishful thinking. As I said, I believe it is more a case of it is not an issue until it is, and at that point they will dictate the terms. Why let it get to that point?

 

[red_instead]

I think the point was lost in gentlemen s' agreements, fishing regulations, accidents etc. The "no take" agreement was supposed to protect the cleaning boats rights (am I right Ken?). Obviously it is no news to anyone that all these years some people did not care and harvested their limit. Some common sense tells me that they would have done anything in their power to stop any relevant activities. They have not and my guess is that they do not care.

One question that I cannot avoid asking is how many of the people that are scallop advocates here, are actually scallop hunters? Do you hunt Ken?

Actually, reading the protocols, I suspect it's less about harvesting rights of third parties, and more about potential liability.

 

[Ken Kurtis]

The "no take" agreement was supposed to protect the cleaning boats rights (am I right Ken?).

I don't think that was necessarily their main thrust on no-take. I think part of their concern was that people would be hammering or spearing and could damage parts of the rigs. (Doesn't matter if any of us think this makes sense or not, that was THEIR thinking and rationale.) Don;t forget that these people we were negotiating wuith we not divers. And as they put it, once we go underwater, they have no idea what we're doing down there so by limiting the variables, they could feel more comfortable with our presence. I think the cleaning-boat-ownership thing was almost an afterthought, sort of like "BTW, our legal people said that the cleaning people own the rights to the marine life they blast off the legs so if you're taking anything you're stealing from them so don't take anything."

Do you hunt Ken?

Only with my camera. But I limit myself to no more than 10 pictures of scallops on any given day.

- Ken

 

[mathauck0814]

I love diving the rigs, and would hate to lose that ability. Are we in imminent danger of doing so? Probably not. But I feel like we will not know until it is too late, and all of a sudden there will be a no dive zone around them. Better safe than sorry.

I actually see very little reason to dive the rigs if not for gathering of scallops. But that's just a personal observation.

 

[Power Scuba]

Exactly my point. It's there so why not take it. No one will notice. I think that is a dangerous attitude and one that has gotten us to some very precarious positions in many environmental areas so far.

Perhaps you missed my multiple assertions that this particular practice (scalloping on the rigs) is demonstrably sustainable (as it stands now)?

---------- Post added June 25th, 2013 at 04:40 PM ----------

I love diving the rigs, and would hate to lose that ability. Are we in imminent danger of doing so? Probably not. But I feel like we will not know until it is too late, and all of a sudden there will be a no dive zone around them. Better safe than sorry.

Respectfully, I don't believe this to be a real possibility/concern. I believe it to be MUCH more of a possibility we lose our rights to dive the rigs as the result of a scuba injury or fatality (at the rigs).

Bill