oceaneering98
Registered
I'll say this, if it was protected you would absolutely know it was.
Show some respect... bug hunters at Casino Point
- Thread starter drbill
- Start date
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
Not true. There are many protected areas around the Channel Islands, but they are only marked on charts and maps. There are no big signs underwater saying "No Take Zone". True, it would be easier at the park.
Since you chimed in, I'll ask you the same question we've posed here many times. We understand that you have a legal right to hunt there, but just because it is legal, should you do it?
oceaneering98
Registered
Game and Fish puts out regulations on fishing and hunting. This is to manage game in particular areas. If it is not a protected area then you have no right to morally judge someone else who is doing what they think is morally acceptable. I am all for parks and protected areas. I enjoy the animals in the sea just as much as anyone else. I am also a hunter and I enjoy hunting my own food forces be it deer, elk, or bugs. So if it is not protected and there is managed hunting in these waters, you do not have the moral high ground in my opinion.
There is not managed hunting there, in fact there is no hunting, and that is why the phrase "shooting fish in a barrel" is appropriate to use on anyone who would do so.
That is not being morally superior, that is stating the conditions that exist there
That is not being morally superior, that is stating the conditions that exist there
But should you hunt there was the question. I absolutely have the right to morally judge someone if they are doing it just because it is legal. That means they have not given it any moral thought.
If you said, "I understand it is a nice place and many people like to see all the animals there, but to me it is still OK", then you will have made a moral decision, not just a legal one. So to you it is just another piece of the ocean. And that is OK. You are entitled to that opinion.
oceaneering98
Registered
Which is how it has been- people have not been hunting there either out of respect for the area or a misunderstanding that the area is protected. I am glad to hear that you would not hunt there based on this sentiment. That is the message we are trying to get out until it is protected.
Which is exactly what we are doing. See earlier posts about the MLPA's.
spoolin01
Contributor
Don't let them grind you down. The hypocrisy on this score is appalling.
Care to explain?
What is hypocritical about wanting to keep the only readily accessible shore dive area on Catalina free of bug hunters? It is a non-issue for non-hunters. It is only an issue for hunters who feel the easy pickins at the park overshadow the desire of many many other divers to keep the park as environmentally sound as possible. I do not think you have seen one post that is strictly anti-hunting. The only posts have been about not hunting in this one area until it can become legally protected, which is not an immediate process.
We tend to judge ourselves by our own sense or right and wrong and others by what they say or do.
Taking game from the dive park is, in our mind, wrong. Therefore, anyone who takes game from the park, even if they comply with all of the state regulations, is violating our personal sense of right and wrong. It's not hypocritical in any sense.
Similar threads
