How would you handle this?

[MXGratefulDiver]

One of the dive shops who has banned him for life is going to approach him and ask the teenager to talk at the gathering?

Have you contacted any other consumptive users, who might have been involved in the sport for a longer time and may have a more well rounded perspective on the issues?

Of course ... it's a close-knit community up here ... we all know (and generally like) each other.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[DepthCharge]

Boy...............alot of people are in need of therapy here..................

 

[cascas]

Complete outsider to this and haven't been a diver for very long, but I know after reading this thread and seeing the news articles I wouldn't want Bob to be my dive partner, nor some of the other posters.

Are you sure you have understood what this thread is about ? If you are, I'm sure the feeling would be mutual...

 

[DaleC]

Rooster, you seem to be madder than most of the people who are actually involved, painting a lot of people with pretty broad brushes, and approaching all this from some other place. I get that but it doesn't help the real situation. Personally I have no axe to grind and am sympathetic to both youth and hunters and hope a resolution works for all concerned.

Unlike the image of the "keyboard warrior" you are fixated with, we see Bob working with other locals to effect positive change and reach out to both sides. He's putting in the footwork to back up what he began. I suspect though, no matter what, you will never be able to see him in any other light than the one you have already determined. Too bad because things appear to be fluid atm and your anger may only be an artifact that most want to leave behind as this thing progresses.

You know you would have reacted better in this situation (great) but I don't have that luxury. Unlike you I have some sympathy for a guy who happens upon such a disturbing scene. I am also prepared to have some sympathy for the young man except the image he projected publicly makes that pretty hard to do. I'll give someone the benefit of the doubt but I'm not intentionally naive.

But of course you haven't taken the time to do the research so you wouldn't know. This allows you to place the young man in the generic role of victim and Bob in the role of bully so you can play out your own pre-conceived version of a morality tale - in which you champion the underdog, little guy, misunderstood, beset upon etal. When I read about the incident my first reaction was: Naw, this can't be right. Then I did some research, part of it was looking at just who this guy was. After that I thought: Yeah, I can see it now. I didn't just jump into the mix with my own perspective and personal experiences as sole guide.

As it is, I think locally, the focus on how this occurred has lessened and the focus on fixing it is well underway. We can keep arguing about the past but it doesn't serve anyone actually involved. It's just for our benefit. In that way we do risk becoming keyboard warriors. For that reason I think I am going to stop posting on this aspect of the past and like Bob, start focusing on something more positive.

 

[CAPTAIN SINBAD]

I just returned from a meeting to plan our presentation to WDFW for an emergency closure of Seacrest Park to octopus hunting. We started that meeting with an agreement among participants that there are two sides to the issue, and we have to respect the rights of hunters just as much as we want them to respect ours. As a consequence, our approach is going to be very specific, very targeted, and will include consideration and input from hunters.

Toward this end, we also decided to invite Dylan to be one of the presenters on Thursday in Olympia. One of the dive shop owners present has volunteered to ask him tomorrow, as they know each other.

We are not trying to give hunters a black eye ... we're trying to preserve something that's valuable to a lot of people, not just one ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I am so glad to see that this situation is starting to move away from a Scuba Jerry Springer to something constructive and meaningful. These efforts may not generate as much audience as the mud-slinging but they will go a long way towards conservation of the octopus and other forms of marine life.

 

[Them]

I think Rooster is mad about exactly the right thing.

Look at the harm, and look at the control each party retained.

Hunter: he killed a cephalopod. His harm is direct, small, controlled, and ends when his actions end.

Bob: He roused a mob, made them angry, and cut them loose. His harm is indirect, potentially huge, totally uncontrollable, and may never completely end.

Hunter: his actions, to the best of Bob's knowledge at the time, were completely legal.

Bob: his direct actions may not have been legal. Inciting, harassment, etc are possible interpretations of his actions. The indirect results of his actions may be even less legal (assault with a deadly weapon, etc).

Hunter: his actions were asocial - they existed outside of my/our society (my kind of people don't do that)

Bob: his actions were antisocial - they cause harm to the social order. They encouraged vigilante behavior. They encouraged a mob to dehumanize and attack an individual.


I think both deserve reproach. Bob deserves more. Especially since he should have known better. To his credit he appears to be taking a more civilized approach now...but his initial reaction has already started harm, harm which may not end for a long time, and he owns his share of all that comes of his actions.

 

[ScubaSteve]

Hunter: he killed a cephalopod. His harm is direct, small, controlled, and ends when his actions end.

His actions were not going to end. It was going to happen every day. I believe these were his words (I apologize if I am recalling things incorrectly)......it does not matter if they were "in the heat of the moment". That was all anybody had to go on and make decisions on at the time. The only option was to take him at his word.

 

[danvolker]

If a 3 year old gets mad and threatens he will kill something, a smart adult will not take this too seriously...If an 18 or 19 year old gets mad and threatens to kill something or someone, a smart adult will address the issue as if it may be attempted.

 

[Reck Diver]

In S. Florida, octopus are considered a nuisance by recreational and commercial Stone Crab fisherman. Octopus frequently come up in crab traps and are always "harvested." I understand conservation groups in the pacific northwest are trying to restore abalone populations. I expect they would want to manage octopus populations.

 

[Them]

His actions were not going to end. It was going to happen every day. I believe these were his words (I apologize if I am recalling things incorrectly)......it does not matter if they were "in the heat of the moment". That was all anybody had to go on and make decisions on at the time. The only option was to take him at his word.

You miss the point. The harm of his actions stop when he stops acting. Maybe he would have come back the next day, maybe not, but the harm was controllable because it stops when he does. There are socially responsible ways of stopping actions, which Bob didn't take at first.

It's like.. The difference between hitting someone, and injecting them with HIV infected blood. The harm of hitting someone (bruises, contusions, possibly fractures) is obviously worse than the harm of an injection (maybe a tiny amount of discomfort and some bleeding)... but you can stop the harm of hitting by stopping hitting. You can't stop the harm of an infected injection, and Bob can't stop the harm of his actions...he triggered something beyond his power to control. He doesn't know what will happen and neither do you. The fact that he is walking away from his first action, and doing what he should have done in the first place, doesn't stop the harm he caused from continuing...and it may continue for years. That is unacceptable and Bob deserves some anger for his actions.