How would you handle this?

[Jim Lapenta]

Any way to encourage him to take up another scuba activity to get his thrills? Like maybe bounce diving? He seems to have that look that says he'd be a "hold my beer and watch this" type. Can't post on his facebook page without friending him. Some of the other pics on his page are quite disturbing.
His page is here:
http://www.facebook.com/#!/dylan.mayer.37?fref=ts

Just look at his photos. Maybe if enough divers friended him and told him what a dip he is would have some effect? Maybe he'd go off and do something stupid like posting pics of him leaving it to rot or tossing it in the trash that would get him in trouble and tossed in jail?

 

[TMHeimer]

We have an area here in So Cal on Catalina called Casino Point. Many divers thought it was a protected area, and treated it as such, even if it was not. Occasionally you'd get some hunter taking from the park, but facing the wrath of the dive community for the same reasons- it was shooting fish in a barrel. It is now a MPA so no more hunting, but for many years it was able to survive just because of a diver's moral code and willingness to keep it unharmed. Go after the MPA, it will be worth it. But also keep up the peer pressure (within reason). It does have an impact.

Well, it's a protected area now. I don't think a hunter in a non-protected area should be subjected to "wrath". When I was 18 in 1972 I collected two Norris Top Shells off the kelp there snorkelling (still in my collection). Hearing about "wrath" prompts me to mention this. If an indiviual is known for hunting at popular dive sites that are not protected, I have no problem with a LDS refusing him air. I would doubt said LSD could be successfully sued for octopus hunter discrimination. Consider drug stores in Northern Canada refusing sale of mouthwash to known alcoholics, or signs like "no shoes, no shirt, no service". This IMO is a good way to go. But direct wrath, for me, is a no no. Same for the following things mentioned:
--checking his catch: can you legally do that?
--taking octopus from him & returning it to water.
--burying up to neck, soldier ants, etc.
--following with speargun.
Assume(?) the last two are tongue and cheek, but it just stirs the pot, causing responses from guys like me.

If the main idea here is to keep as much aquatic life possible in a popular dive area, I agree with a lot that has been said. My problem at times is with those who tie this into species population declines when they may not be at all an expert on such.

 

[lowviz]

...//... At this point, I want to focus less on the idiot who created this issue than on what we can do to make it less likely to be repeated. ...//...

Good approach. Try *election year* and a local rep looking to hit one out of the park in the bottom of the ninth...

 

[Jim Lapenta]

After just speaking with someone at the Washington Dept. of Fish and Game there is not a lot that can be done now. UNLESS it can be proven that he is wasting the catch. Ie the photo of it spread out in a parking lot that is obviously at night on his facebook page tells me that he is not processing it in a timely manner. Maybe somebody in the area can bring that to the attention of the enforcment division that I could not seem to get connected to.

 

[letterboy]

Or he could be measuring it before making calamari out of it...

Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Jim Lapenta]

Good approach. Try *election year* and a local rep looking to hit one out of the park in the bottom of the ninth...

Excellent idea! Start a petition and get a local rep to back it. Hit up all of them. Incumbents and wannabe's. And get some little kids involved as part of a conservation program. Politicians never want to be seen ignoring kids. Any way to get a group of school kids to be doing a nature day nearby when he brings one out and have them start asking why he "murdered that mama octopus?" and "what will happen to her babies now!" while someone films it? Playing fair? Oh hell no! No reason to. How fair is it to kill a nesting mother?

 

[freewillie]

Social networking is an amazing thing ... but I don't do Facebook.

I just got another call from a local TV station.

We need to harness all this energy and turn it into something positive ... the question is how.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Invite the local city council member to be present when the media journalist arrives from the local TV station. Start petitioning at city council for Marine Park Area designation. Start campaign to get attention local state congressman, US congressman, etc. Get the largest or most respected local dive club to start social network campaign the the aforementioned.

 

[boulderjohn]

Having looked through the FaceBook site and pictures, I think I have a pretty fair grasp of him and his values. I doubt if shaming him will do any good. In fact, I suspect these actions will become something to brag about in his circle.

Some of you may recall an incident a year or so ago that involved a spearfisher who didn't surface after taking a partially filled AL 80 down below 200 feet to go hunting solo for big grouper at twilight after fishing and drinking beer all day. In the thread that developed about that, some people actually thought that some of what he did was unsafe. (Imagine that!) That thread was immediately flooded with posts from a group I would consider on the fringes of the diving world. These people not only saw nothing wrong with what that diver did, they vigorously attacked everyone who even suggested that he had done something unsafe with such venom that ScubaBoard did something that almost never happens--they deleted the entire thread. My sense is that this diver would be of that ilk, and I suspect he has many friends who are also of that ilk. Nothing is gong to shame him because he sees absolutely nothing wrong with what he is doing and he sees a whole lot wrong with those who disagree.

I think changing the laws is your best bet.

 

[Lopez116]

How so?

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Not doing anything illegal. As far as I understand it, Bob only posted a photo of the guy in a public place holding up an octopus on Facebook. No invasion of privacy there. If Bob posted his opinion of what he thought of the guy on his Facebook page, no defamation there either.

There is also no harassment here either. In CA, there's no way his actions would amount to harassment. In Washington, civil harassment is conduct which:

1. seriously alarms, annoys, harasses, or harms you without “serving a legitimate purpose”; AND
2. reasonably causes you to suffer substantial emotional distress (harm); or reasonably causes you to fear for the well-being of your child.

The "course of conduct" constituting harassment has to a) not serve a legitimate purpose, and b) not include constitutionally protected activity or constitutionally protected speech.

There's a legitimate purpose (environmental preservation and activism) and even if there wasn't, his actions of posting the photo, commenting on it, and spreading the word would likely constitute protected free speech.

The octopus had a way better harassment claim.

Disclaimer: Bob, I'm not your lawyer.

 

[mdb]

Not doing anything illegal. As far as I understand it, Bob only posted a photo of the guy in a public place holding up an octopus on Facebook. No invasion of privacy there. If Bob posted his opinion of what he thought of the guy on his Facebook page, no defamation there either.

There is also no harassment here either. In CA, there's no way his actions would amount to harassment. In Washington, civil harassment is conduct which:

1. seriously alarms, annoys, harasses, or harms you without “serving a legitimate purpose”; AND
2. reasonably causes you to suffer substantial emotional distress (harm); or reasonably causes you to fear for the well-being of your child.

The "course of conduct" constituting harassment has to a) not serve a legitimate purpose, and b) not include constitutionally protected activity or constitutionally protected speech.

There's a legitimate purpose (environmental preservation and activism) and even if there wasn't, his actions of posting the photo, commenting on it, and spreading the word would likely constitute protected free speech.

The octopus had a way better harassment claim.

Disclaimer: Bob, I'm not your lawyer.

The SCUBA police are active everywhere.