More scubadivers equals:

More divers equals

  • Better public awareness of the environment

    Votes: 30 37.5%
  • Improved protection for our reefs

    Votes: 18 22.5%
  • Improved economy for third world countries

    Votes: 21 26.3%
  • More harm to the reefs

    Votes: 31 38.8%
  • More harm to the environment

    Votes: 13 16.3%
  • Worsen the economy of third world countries

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Increased incidence of diving accidents

    Votes: 33 41.3%
  • Lower quality of diving education

    Votes: 23 28.8%
  • Better quality of diving education

    Votes: 6 7.5%
  • Divers cause negligible effect on the environment

    Votes: 12 15.0%
  • Will flood scubaboard with stupid people

    Votes: 22 27.5%
  • Old geezers will have more to gripe about

    Votes: 31 38.8%

  • Total voters
    80

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

fisherdvm

Contributor
Messages
3,577
Reaction score
52
# of dives
200 - 499
A person argued that too many divers equals harm to the reefs. I argue the opposite.

Cozumel would not have a national park protecting prized reefs without divers. Divers support the economy in Cozumel. Without divers, they would not have 3000+ taxi drivers, hundreds of working middle class divemasters, and supporting 20000 citizens.

Without divers and tourists, third world countries would not look at reefs as resources, and will turn to harmful industries like aquaculture, shrimp farming, and commercial fishing.

Despite arguments that divers today are nothing more than rototillers on the reefs - I argue that they will bring awareness to the ecology of the reef environment.
 
JahJahwarrior:
How do we harm the reefs?

after asking this, ask how fishing by dragging nets along the bottom of the ocean harms the reefs.

I hate to ask this, but aren't most coral reefs found only in the top 100 ft of the ocean?? What disturbed me in Hawaii are gill nets set by the native (and others?) in the reefs... But I guess for native people, it is their way of life.

I think we should do more to control the aquarium industry, but I don't know enough about this problem.
 
There are going to be arguments both ways. Certainly, careless divers can harm reef systems by dragging equipment, taking what should not be taken, "rototilling", etc...
However, much depends upon the area that is being discussed. There is no doubt that one of the areas I frequent (Flower Gardens Banks, Gulf of Mexico) gets quite a bit of dive traffic. However, largely because of this, the area has gained a great deal of support and was made a National Marine Sanctuary fairly recently. That designation offers a modicum of protection from such activities as anchoring (by heavy ships like freighters and tankers) and commercial fishing ("sport" fishing is still allowed, just not netting and such). The result is a very healthy reef system. The main threats to the FGBNMS do not come from divers and, in fact, the NMS tries its best to use diving as an educational tool to make the issues concerning reef systems common knowledge among the general populace.
In some parts of the world, as most of us know, reefs systems are threatened from many activities including cyanide poisoning and dynamiting to capture aquarium specimens, gross overtaking of sport species and sharks, runaway development, clearcutting of vegetation on nearby shores, and commercial development. In these areas, damage by divers is the least of their worries.
Do more divers automatically translate into greater damage? It doesn't have to be that way. Does that mean that more divers equates to better education and understanding? Not necessarily. It all depends on the efforts of a whole lot of people and the amount of work that goes into the understanding of these very complex ecosystems.

In short, there are few blanket statements that can be made. Instead, threats need to be studied and weighed on an individual basis, and actions need to be almost site specific.
 
More divers does not HAVE to equal more damage to the reefs. But for that to happen they have to be made aware of how important it is to not touch the reefs and to have the skills to do so.

Was in Key West this past July and there were divers STANDING on Western Dry Rocks reef. The boat captain was yelling at them and they just stared blankly back, all the while killing more coral. He told me it happens all the time.

As long as proper skills are stressed and followed, people should be ok to be close to the reefs, but alas many are not and frequently do damage that they did not intend to do, not because they didn't want to, but because they could not avoid it, due to a lack of skills and traning.

Chris
 
1amphibian:
More divers does not HAVE to equal more damage to the reefs. But for that to happen they have to be made aware of how important it is to not touch the reefs and to have the skills to do so.

Was in Key West this past July and there were divers STANDING on Western Dry Rocks reef. The boat captain was yelling at them and they just stared blankly back, all the while killing more coral. He told me it happens all the time.

As long as proper skills are stressed and followed, people should be ok to be close to the reefs, but alas many are not and frequently do damage that they did not intend to do, not because they didn't want to, but because they could not avoid it, due to a lack of skills and traning.

Chris

I'll bet they weren't certified by paddy waddy??
 
Here's the thing. To a point, more divers is better due to awareness. Then you hit another point where more divers, even with good skills start to have other negative impacts due to thing more than just dive skill. (think boats etc). This is the 'carrying capacity' concept. Each site can only tolerate a certain disturbance. (or in animals, each environment can only support a certian number of animals. Go over, and bad things happen)

That said, I bet we could have more divers now if they all had good skills and do less damage then currently is the norm. I would argue that is not so much the numbers now as the actions of the current numbers.
 
There is no cookie cutter answer here...

Diver impact has to consider more than just fin-meets-reef and include the impact from the increased infrastructure needed to support that demand. it seems to me that economic development is a double edged sword and if not carefully managed can do more harm than good

Along the same lines, I'd also bet that most Marine Parks are the result of a few activist divers and local officials. The throngs of vacation divers and the revenue they generate is certainly used to build a compelling case for parks but they are really not part of the process. In fact i've heard more than a few vacation only divers gripe about the nominal fees used to support the parks.
 
Well, we should do what we can to not harm the reefs. However, from what I saw in Key West in June and Grand Cayman in November, looks like the hurricanes have caused more reef destruction than all of us could accidently inflect.

Just the cycle of nature, I suppose.
 

Back
Top Bottom