CCTX50
Contributor
I have copied the following from the "CHUM" website. I thought that it was interesting enough to bring to other attention. I do not know how true it is but it is worth the read.
From the Flower Gardens organization....
Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (FGBNMS) will be hosting a Public Meeting on Thursday, December 9th. This will be an opportunity to ask questions about the recently released Draft Management Plan (DMP) and submit your comments.
WHEN: Thursday, December 9, 2010
4-8 p.m.
WHERE: Sanctuary Headquarters
4700 Avenue U, Building 216
Galveston, TX 77551
PRESENTATION TIMES: 4:15 and 6:15 p.m.
Presentations will provide a brief overview of the DMP and proposed regulatory changes. Sanctuary staff will be available to answer questions throughout the meeting.
For more information on the DMP and other means to submit comments please visit our web site at Welcome to Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
We hope you will take this opportunity to participate in this public process. Thank you.
Quote:
At the last meeting I had with the reps. from the major clubs, I was asked whether the DMP was a prelude to shutting divers out from the FGBNMS. I told them no, it was just formalizing what practices the Fling and Spree had been doing for years. For that reason comments were not made by TGCC on this issue at the Public Session on the FGBNMS DMP on November 17th. We plan to correct this when we follow-up with written comments to the DMP and proposed regulations.
I really believe that formalizing the diving practices currently being done was the intent of the DMP. But the wording they have chosen to use, and the supporting information contained in the proposed regulation and DMP, paint a grim picture of what is going on at the FGBNMS and appears to require much more restrictive policies.
The actual proposal regulations have been released. They support that the club reps. were right and I was wrong to defend the DMPs intent. As written the diver and vessel operator bear an undue responsibility for actions initiated by the creatures themselves. Regulations are the basis of how people with no knowledge of the situation make decisions and prosecute violators. The words must stand on their own. And with its present wording - that is not good for vessel operators and divers. If you have to assume anything when reading these regulations, then the regulations are poorly written.
For example 922.122 (7) Killing, injuring, attracting, touching, or disturbing a ray or whale shark in the Sanctuary. That means that if a whale shark comes up to the Spree while its moored and rubs against it you qualify for a fine of up to $100,000 or possible vessel forfeiture. The reporting system in the Visitors Use aspects of the plan might even be the method the couple of fishermen who saw the encounter reported it, including time and dates stamped photos. (They only reported it to find out if the rules that applied to them also applied to divers. Great example of two user groups shooting each other in the foot.)
Now you can argue that the whale shark initiated the behavior and this is normal for them. Well, sorry. The regulation is quiet on that issue and thus the diver or boater will not prevail if the case is litigated. You could quote the definition of Attract or attracting in 922.121 Definitions, but that only applies to Attract or attracting not touching aspect of section 922.122(7).
This regulation proposal needs a lot of work. They talk a lot about Mantas and Whale Sharks, mention Mobulas and spotted eagle rays, then suddenly generalize to all rays. Well, all these rays behave differently they should just stick with regulating the Mantas and Mobulas if they want to make sense. They also miss the facts that their natural behavior is to interact with humans. They make contact; they stop their normal feeding activity and seek out divers (sometimes even before they get into the water) and boats.
I think we need to detail something like:
A three foot (five foot?) rule for limiting a diver initiated approach to a whale shark, manta or mobula ray. (Or a five foot for a manta and a 10 foot for a whale shark).
A requirement for a diver to disengage from a whale shark, manta or mobula ray without rubbing should these creatures make physical contact.
A procedure for a vessel at mooring for when a whale shark, manta or mobula ray makes contact with their vessel or positions itself under the dive ladders.
A procedure for a vessel tied up to an oil & gas platform when a whale shark, manta or mobula ray makes contact with their vessel or positions itself under the dive ladders.
A procedure for a vessel in transit in the sanctuary when a whale shark, manta or mobula ray is sighted.
An acknowledgement that when a whale shark, manta or mobula ray touches or goes through an oil & gas platform the creature is initiating the behavior and it is not a violation of the regulations.
The discussion contained in these proposed regulations and DMP seem to cover about 1/3rd the information known about these creatures. The parts missing deal with their intelligence and how they interact with divers. They also paint a picture of doom for these creatures when they decide to leave the dive area rays and whale sharks expend energy in ways other than feeding and other natural activities, which can affect their overall health. Ive heard this about animals, in winter, in the Artic. Youve seen how little effort it takes a manta to leave a diver in the dust. You wonder if all the science quoted in this proposed regulation is applicable to the situation at the FGBNMS.
Remember the old days when a diver would stand in a sand patch and a manta would come in and offer the diver a ride. Both had fun. With the sanctuary coming in 1991 the rides stopped, divers had the thrill of interaction with these magnificent creatures but the number of mantas dropped off (there was no fun left for the manta). Now we appear to be moving to a regulatory point where a diver would have more fun watching these creatures at an aquarium. If the interaction goes, so will the divers. If divers begin to be charged under these regs., the dive clubs will advise their members to dive somewhere else.
I believe that divers go to the FGBNMS because its a well management dive area with a good record of safety. The biggest reason they come is to interact with the larger marine life in a health marine environment. It if becomes a place where every time a manta makes a right turn, or comes towards you, or a sting ray darts out of the sand the diver is looking a warning or fine there will be no reason to come. The FGBNMS holds the promise of interaction with these creatures. If that now becomes a place where sit in place a pray something comes along is the name of the game then along with the manta rays dropping off, so will the divers.
Think about this. Right now we can make this regulation and DMP reflect what you and Mel have been doing all along Respectful diving, outstanding marine/diver interaction without riding, touching, or harassing. If you think this is what the regulation will do as it stands, do nothing. But if it needs a little tweaking you need to send your input to the Manager of the FGBNMS.
Keep in touch,
Frank Burek
From the Flower Gardens organization....
Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (FGBNMS) will be hosting a Public Meeting on Thursday, December 9th. This will be an opportunity to ask questions about the recently released Draft Management Plan (DMP) and submit your comments.
WHEN: Thursday, December 9, 2010
4-8 p.m.
WHERE: Sanctuary Headquarters
4700 Avenue U, Building 216
Galveston, TX 77551
PRESENTATION TIMES: 4:15 and 6:15 p.m.
Presentations will provide a brief overview of the DMP and proposed regulatory changes. Sanctuary staff will be available to answer questions throughout the meeting.
For more information on the DMP and other means to submit comments please visit our web site at Welcome to Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
We hope you will take this opportunity to participate in this public process. Thank you.
Quote:
At the last meeting I had with the reps. from the major clubs, I was asked whether the DMP was a prelude to shutting divers out from the FGBNMS. I told them no, it was just formalizing what practices the Fling and Spree had been doing for years. For that reason comments were not made by TGCC on this issue at the Public Session on the FGBNMS DMP on November 17th. We plan to correct this when we follow-up with written comments to the DMP and proposed regulations.
I really believe that formalizing the diving practices currently being done was the intent of the DMP. But the wording they have chosen to use, and the supporting information contained in the proposed regulation and DMP, paint a grim picture of what is going on at the FGBNMS and appears to require much more restrictive policies.
The actual proposal regulations have been released. They support that the club reps. were right and I was wrong to defend the DMPs intent. As written the diver and vessel operator bear an undue responsibility for actions initiated by the creatures themselves. Regulations are the basis of how people with no knowledge of the situation make decisions and prosecute violators. The words must stand on their own. And with its present wording - that is not good for vessel operators and divers. If you have to assume anything when reading these regulations, then the regulations are poorly written.
For example 922.122 (7) Killing, injuring, attracting, touching, or disturbing a ray or whale shark in the Sanctuary. That means that if a whale shark comes up to the Spree while its moored and rubs against it you qualify for a fine of up to $100,000 or possible vessel forfeiture. The reporting system in the Visitors Use aspects of the plan might even be the method the couple of fishermen who saw the encounter reported it, including time and dates stamped photos. (They only reported it to find out if the rules that applied to them also applied to divers. Great example of two user groups shooting each other in the foot.)
Now you can argue that the whale shark initiated the behavior and this is normal for them. Well, sorry. The regulation is quiet on that issue and thus the diver or boater will not prevail if the case is litigated. You could quote the definition of Attract or attracting in 922.121 Definitions, but that only applies to Attract or attracting not touching aspect of section 922.122(7).
This regulation proposal needs a lot of work. They talk a lot about Mantas and Whale Sharks, mention Mobulas and spotted eagle rays, then suddenly generalize to all rays. Well, all these rays behave differently they should just stick with regulating the Mantas and Mobulas if they want to make sense. They also miss the facts that their natural behavior is to interact with humans. They make contact; they stop their normal feeding activity and seek out divers (sometimes even before they get into the water) and boats.
I think we need to detail something like:
A three foot (five foot?) rule for limiting a diver initiated approach to a whale shark, manta or mobula ray. (Or a five foot for a manta and a 10 foot for a whale shark).
A requirement for a diver to disengage from a whale shark, manta or mobula ray without rubbing should these creatures make physical contact.
A procedure for a vessel at mooring for when a whale shark, manta or mobula ray makes contact with their vessel or positions itself under the dive ladders.
A procedure for a vessel tied up to an oil & gas platform when a whale shark, manta or mobula ray makes contact with their vessel or positions itself under the dive ladders.
A procedure for a vessel in transit in the sanctuary when a whale shark, manta or mobula ray is sighted.
An acknowledgement that when a whale shark, manta or mobula ray touches or goes through an oil & gas platform the creature is initiating the behavior and it is not a violation of the regulations.
The discussion contained in these proposed regulations and DMP seem to cover about 1/3rd the information known about these creatures. The parts missing deal with their intelligence and how they interact with divers. They also paint a picture of doom for these creatures when they decide to leave the dive area rays and whale sharks expend energy in ways other than feeding and other natural activities, which can affect their overall health. Ive heard this about animals, in winter, in the Artic. Youve seen how little effort it takes a manta to leave a diver in the dust. You wonder if all the science quoted in this proposed regulation is applicable to the situation at the FGBNMS.
Remember the old days when a diver would stand in a sand patch and a manta would come in and offer the diver a ride. Both had fun. With the sanctuary coming in 1991 the rides stopped, divers had the thrill of interaction with these magnificent creatures but the number of mantas dropped off (there was no fun left for the manta). Now we appear to be moving to a regulatory point where a diver would have more fun watching these creatures at an aquarium. If the interaction goes, so will the divers. If divers begin to be charged under these regs., the dive clubs will advise their members to dive somewhere else.
I believe that divers go to the FGBNMS because its a well management dive area with a good record of safety. The biggest reason they come is to interact with the larger marine life in a health marine environment. It if becomes a place where every time a manta makes a right turn, or comes towards you, or a sting ray darts out of the sand the diver is looking a warning or fine there will be no reason to come. The FGBNMS holds the promise of interaction with these creatures. If that now becomes a place where sit in place a pray something comes along is the name of the game then along with the manta rays dropping off, so will the divers.
Think about this. Right now we can make this regulation and DMP reflect what you and Mel have been doing all along Respectful diving, outstanding marine/diver interaction without riding, touching, or harassing. If you think this is what the regulation will do as it stands, do nothing. But if it needs a little tweaking you need to send your input to the Manager of the FGBNMS.
Keep in touch,
Frank Burek
