Show some respect... bug hunters at Casino Point

[Leejnd]

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.

Hypocrisy is an issue that has come up a few times over the course of this thread. Some feel that it's hypocritical for hunters to consider it *wrong* to hunt in the park - I guess the thought process is that if we're willing to hunt anywhere else, we shouldn't be against hunting in the park.

I believe this is coming mostly from non-hunters, who I think feel that if you're a hunter, you're a hunter - period.

I disagree. I AM a hunter - I love to hunt for lobsters (that's the only hunting I do, other than the occasional scallop, which isn't so much "hunting" as it is "gathering"). But I will NOT hunt in the dive park - even though I know it's legal to do so. I consider it disrespectful to my fellow divers to hunt there. Why? Well, I explained it before in this thread: I feel that this is a special, unusual spot that should be preserved as much as possible. There is no other place like it in SoCal. It offers students, new divers, and tourists an opportunity to see the best of what SoCal diving has to offer, without all the challenges of typical shore dives, or costs/limitations of boat dives. If unfettered hunting were to take place there, it would lose some of its appeal. It would change the environment, leaving less marine life for divers to see.

I just don't think it's too much to ask of divers to refrain from hunting there. There are so many OTHER places to hunt. Leave it all in place for the rest of us to see. Sure, it's legal, it's just...inconsiderate and selfish. It's doing something for your own benefit, to the detriment of others.

I do not consider that to be hypocritical at all.

On the topic of legal vs. illegal:

Filling up your entire plate with all the chocolate-covered strawberries at a buffet, leaving none for the people behind you, isn't illegal. It's just selfish and inconsiderate, doing something for your benefit that you don't NEED, you just WANT, to the detriment of others. I use this analogy because I actually saw this on a cruise ship once - there were about 20 Godiva-chocolate-covered strawberries left, and about 15 people left in line, all of which were really looking forward to those strawberries. The guy in front of me cleaned 'em out, leaving none for the rest of us. Believe me when I tell you that everyone behind him in line thought he was an inconsiderate a-hole.

I see hunters at the dive park the same way I see that glutton on the cruise ship.

 

[spoolin01]

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.

No argument with any but the last sentence, which can only be determined in context. It's not hypocritical to to want others to do things your way, but it is hypocritical to not treat them the same way you're asking to be treated. To cut to the chase, if you've supported the MLPAs that have and are being established up and down the CA coast, you haven't respected their traditions or sensibilities, you've just taken an opportunity to have your way when it became available - which is all the lobster hunters are doing.

I've made the safe assumption that this applied to many here: to all who posted here in criticism of legal lobster take in legal zones, if you also spoke out against the over-reach and lack of integrity in the MLPA process, you are not a hypocrite.

 

[Teamcasa]

No argument with any but the last sentence, which can only be determined in context. ....
I've made the safe assumption that this applied to many here: to all who posted here in criticism of legal lobster take in legal zones, if you also spoke out against the over-reach and lack of integrity in the MLPA process, you are not a hypocrite.

I've made my position pretty clear earlier in the thread and elsewhere but allow me a little reiteration.

I was a serious hunter and gather of many underwater creatures and can see the devastating effects to this day. I no longer hunt or gather sea life.
I have no objection to the legal taking of lobsters.
I am in favor of the existing and expansion of MPLAs.
My reasons for keeping the park free from hunters is first, a selfish one. I want to see the animals when I dive.
Second, I want all of the other divers (and future divers) to see the magnificence we experience when diving the park.

 

[spoolin01]

I haven't read the entire thread so thank you for the context. I think other than not yet being an ex-extractive user or supporting the new MLPAs, I think the same way. I dive NorCal except for bug trips over the years to the northern Channel Islands, both before and after the MPAs which so far as I could tell were not much of an imposition on the recreational take tradition, except maybe at Anacapa. I gather that down there, like up here, there are sites that have been severely depleted of fish and some other species. I favor use of MPAs in those limited instances. The process that has concluded in the Central and North-Central zones, and is concluding I believe in SoCal, and proceeding in the far north, has not taken that approach. Instead when the opportunity presented itself, as much habitat was put off-limits to fishing as was procedurally and politically tolerable, using the 'try to stop us' definition of tolerable, paid for by private anti-fishing interests. The purpose of the MLPA process was not to compensate for deficiencies in existing fisheries management - those practices have been mostly successful by traditional definitions - it was to turn enormous tracts of traditional sustainable fishing grounds into giant marine parks. You can argue back and forth whether one approach or another is the better for whatever your objectives are.

On the narrow question of whether one can blythely and publicly impune the character or morals of bug hunters at Casino Point without appearing hypocritical, I think only one's own attitudes and actions about respecting the traditions and sensibilities of those recreational fishermen who have been kicked out of their 'parks' can be used to answer it.

 

[Teamcasa]

...On the narrow question of whether one can blythely and publicly impune the character or morals of bug hunters at Casino Point without appearing hypocritical, I think only one's own attitudes and actions about respecting the traditions and sensibilities of those recreational fishermen who have been kicked out of their 'parks' can be used to answer it.

To many of us, watching a guy hunt in the park is like watching someone pull up the flowers at our favorite campground.

Having been an avid offshore fisherman, I do get it. But since the governments (of many nations) fold so easily to commercial fishing interests we, the recreational divers, hunters and fishers are left to the choice of respecting the local customs and interests.

 

[spoolin01]

(What is it with the lopsided analogies today...?) 'Picking' flowers would be a little fairer - the lobsters too will be back next year, or however their cycles run. Some species are just easier to deplete than others. I'd be more annoyed at someone pulling up flowers than picking them, done judiciously. At any rate my contention was less about conditions in this spot than throwing stones from glass houses.


I don't follow your intent in the second paragraph... I'm no fan of the efficiency or waste of commercial fishing, yet it seems like the ocean will of necessity become increasingly relied upon for the meat needs of the world. It historically has provided recreation as well, and more, in pursuit of those needs, in a manner of comparatively low impact as human activities go. It's much easier to agitate for customs you favor than to show forebearance in the face of the customs of others.

 

[merxlin]

(What is it with the lopsided analogies today...?) 'Picking' flowers would be a little fairer - the lobsters too will be back next year, or however their cycles run. Some species are just easier to deplete than others. I'd be more annoyed at someone pulling up flowers than picking them, done judiciously. At any rate my contention was less about conditions in this spot than throwing stones from glass houses.


I don't follow your intent in the second paragraph... I'm no fan of the efficiency or waste of commercial fishing, yet it seems like the ocean will of necessity become increasingly relied upon for the meat needs of the world. It historically has provided recreation as well, and more, in pursuit of those needs, in a manner of comparatively low impact as human activities go. It's much easier to agitate for customs you favor than to show forebearance in the face of the customs of others.

So in other words you do not know anything about lobster. But its a big ocean so they'll be back, right? If you know anything about the abalone population in California, you'd know that sentiment like that has no basis in fact.

And your knowledge of what is happening to the oceans because of commercial fishing or should I say lack of knowledge of that situation is just humorous. With the number of species being fished out and the lack of any global control over it continuing to happen, if we are going to rely on the oceans for "the meat needs of the world" I hope you really really like vegetables.

 

[stakanak]

Wow, what the hell is going on here?
I love to fish, and have been doing so off of California and around the world for most of my life.
I do not agree with some of the areas the MLPA charts are designating as "no take zones."
I would not, however, fish in an aquarium, and that is what Casino Point is, an open ocean aquarium reminiscent of the past beauty of the flora and fauna of Catalina.
Some of the big Calico bass have names and are probably over 30 years old. There is a 30 lb sheepshead(can't recall the name of him) that comes to you like a dog.
It is a small piece of paradise(very small)that should be left alone.
I love fishing Catalina, but honestly, why do it there when the rest of the Island is open to the fishing and hunting public(and the fishing is good too)?
There is no hypocrisy here!
Dr. Bill is well respected in the dive community and has been fighting to protect this area for years and many others like myself have sent letters to the DFG to make this a no take zone.
Just my opinion.
Get Wet!

 

[prophet98g]

Good luck if you have to use any force during that arrest. I am sure the good old ninth circuit will look very favorably on your activities.

 

[D_B]

There has been virtually no hunting in the dive park for a long time.
There is much more life there because of that.
That life has been, and is accustomed to, divers presence there and show no fear of, or need to hide from, divers

why should we not look down upon any that would use those facts to their advantage, and to the detriment of the many other divers?