Show some respect... bug hunters at Casino Point

[Rainer]

I'm sorry you're hurt about what I see to be a pretty benign honest disagreement. I think everyone has hypocritical beliefs (I certainly do); that doesn't make someone a bad person. In this particular case, we're just not going to see eye-to-eye. I think we've each made our cases clear (rationally and without attack); we just don't agree. If that makes you want to leave the discussion, that's a shame.

That said, I've made my opinion known; not going to keep hammering this drum. I'm happy to see the park made no-take. If other areas become reserves as well, I'm not going to shed any tears. I, too, look forward to enjoying and promoting our local diving. I will, however, continue to refrain from harassing those who choose to hunt legally.

Okay fine. You've made your feelings clear. I strongly disagree with you. I do not consider myself to be a hypocrite at all, and I'll be real honest and say that your saying that hurts. I've never met you, but I have always respected your posts -- your passion for diving, your knowledge about DIR and willingness to share and educate others without belittling them. But if that's how you feel, fine. I will post to this thread no longer.

And I will continue to promote SoCal diving, AND promote protecting our beautiful park.

 

[merxlin]

If you don't hunt, my comments clearly weren't directed at you. Many who *have* posted here, happily hunt at other sites. That's what some find hypocritical (and I'm not alone in that thought).

And I disagree that it is hypocritical. We are not opposed to all hunting, not all fishing, only in one specific area designated area that is specifically meant for divers.

Yes, you're wrong. As I clearly said (in the section you just quoted, by the way...) education should begin now. If you see someone hunting in the park, talk to them about why you'd hope they wouldn't. Make your point rationally. Your solution in an earlier post was to lie to people. Not how I think you should proceed..

Where have I EVER condoned lying to people? If you are referring to the comment that some divers believed that the park was protected based on what they were told, that was not ME telling them. I was one of those who thought the park was protected, not because I was told it was illegal to hunt, but because I was told "we don't hunt there".

And let's get serious, "nothing to save"? There are at most a handful of people taking from the dive park while the rest of the coast is being picked clean and you're worried about the park and not those areas? Again, seek perspective.

One more time- The dive park is not the only area we are trying to protect. Again, look at the MLPA threads. The dive park is just one area in those and you have to start somewhere.

And where is your data about how many are hunting in the park? How do you know it is only a few? Anecdotal evidence is all we have, but that evidence is mounting that A) people are pouching in the park (tailless bodies found prior to the season) and B) the lobster population is much lower than previous years.

Seriously, read what was posted here (http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/5526576-post10.html). THAT is the attitude I think we could all do without. We do not need to chase, shame, or scorn anyone acting legally. We can disagree with their actions, but handle it like adults.

I've read Ken's comments and yes he is passionate about this issue. But where does he chase, shame or scorn anyone? He talks about one discussion that had a diver actually return the lobster. He says the Park is "protected by us" as divers who care and will have those conversations when necessary, or post on discussion boards, or write F&G or committees who are establishing the MPLA's. I see nothing any more aggressive than that. You are projecting something into this that isn't there. There are no groups of vigilante divers going around with torches rallying the townspeople to strip the game bags off the law abiding hunters.

Your first question can only be answered by those who hunt it the park. I don't. Education should start by making your case rationally to divers about why hunting (either in the park or in general) runs counter to their selfish interests in seeing critters while they dive.

I'm sorry you do not feel my arguments here are rational. I'm not sure how else to present them so I will have to agree to disagree with you on this issue.

 

[riguerin]

Why do you need to hunt in this park ?

I haven't heard a reasonable argument yet as to why there, and not outside it


I see that most (if not everyone) has said they wouldn't hunt there ... so who is doing it?

It truly saddened me to read this post. The dive park, whether backed by law or not, , is in fact a marine life sanctuary. Its long standing defacto protected status has allowed the marine life to flourish here to levels which have not been seen on most parts of the island in decades. It is truly a special place and certainly one of my favorite personal dive sites...anywhere. IMHO even without legal protection, it is without a doubt one of diving's hallowed grounds.

If you've ever done a night dive in the park, then you know that the place is literally crawling with bugs ...tons of them. Almost to the point that it's creepy...like something out of an alien movie. Since they are conditioned to not fear divers, even the biggest lunkers are easily approachable. Hunting lobster in the park is literally analogous to "shooting fish in a barrel." To be clear, it is cheating !

I can almost excuse ignorance. As Ken pointed out, it's often easily corrected with a gentle and constructive message. The situation that he described is an excellent example of a behavior we can all strive to emulate.

My personal diving experience has now spanned a couple decades (meager compared to Dr Bill's)...yet I can bear direct witness to the clear and indisputable evidence of the failures of our fisheries management over this period. Yet, there are glimmers of hope that the damage could be reversed. This dive park is one of those.

Like others, I'm all for protecting this site. I personally have no problem abiding with the understood contract we currently have in place with nature. However, if we truly need to pass some sort of legislation to legitimize this contract, then I'm all for that too. Tell me what I can do to help.

Thanks for sharing Dr. Bill, DB, and others.

 

[drbill]

I guess I'm confused by the amount of effort going into protecting just a few hundred feet of Catalina while the rest is being rapped and pillaged daily. Seems that if the general population saw what the rest of the island looked like they'd be more willing to support the MLPA's.

Trust me I'm not in favor of hunting in the park, it just seems to me peoples energy is being mis directed to protect just their back yards.

I, too, hate it when divers play that rap music underwater too.

Why protect the park? I agree that it is not a scientifically appropriate marine reserve due to its small size. The reason to protect it is so more people have a chance to see what a more natural ecosystem might look like and can compare it to the adjacent areas that have indeed been devastated by take (legal and not).

I've worked for 20 years to get more of the island designated as marine reserves. I did my doctoral dissertation on that topic back in the 90s. I might add that one of my papers published in the Intl. Journal of Marine Geodesy was chosen as one of 10 important papers to send to Dr. Jane Lubchenco, head of NOAA, in advance of the federal marine reserve program planning.

The marine reserves around the island that are part of the South Coast MLPA planning are inadequate in my opinion both in terms in areal extent and mostly in terms of placement. I would have chosen a different array to meet the criteria requested. However, I am glad that the State is finally acting.

There is another interesting question regarding legality and doing what is "right" that is related to the dive park. As divers who visit the park in winter and spring now, the invasive Sargassum filicinum (= horneri) from Japan dominates our ecosystems then.

Legally I cannot remove it from the park other than as follows. I can buy a fishing license and take up to 10 pounds per day. Despite the fact that it is an invasive doing extensive damage to the native flora and fauna of the park, I cannot just rip it out as many of us would like to do. In this case, it is my opinion (and that of many other divers) that we should be allowed to remove this noxious weed even though such removal would be illegal.

I looked into a special permit from CDF&G when it first appeared in the dive park, but was told it would take 4 1/2 months to get one. By that time it would have reproduced and the effort would be far less effective.

 

[drbill]

I'm willing to bet Cody that you do not see the value in the dive park. Maybe you've never been there. That's too bad.

He has... but maybe he has been too busy doing drills to see what is around him (just teasing ya on that one)

So yes, we are speaking out about "our back yard", but only because of a trend in the people using the park no longer appreciating what they have. But I'll be damned if I will sit by and watch as it gets decimated by a selfish few.

The good thing is that it is only a "selfish few." I take heart in the fact that the vast majority of divers who dive the park respect it. I am concerned that some who do show respect for it themselves, are fine with others who don't.

 

[drbill]

I highly doubt some tourist is coming to the dive park with all their gear in tow plus a cooler to keep the lobsters fresh till they can get home. I'd have to guess it's someone local hunting....cause it's an easy location to hunt at (easy access, easy entry, easy to find lobsters....easy).

While I'd probably agree that locals would be highly suspect, the truth is that very few locals dive. Other than local instructors, I almost never see any locals at the dive park day or night. However, it certainly is a possibility and a logical one "on the surface."

However, we have evidence through direct observation of people bringing bugs back to hotels, cleaning them and stuffing them into coolers for the trip home. Other divers have observed folks taking coolers home on the boats with far more than a legal take. Some of the observers have even asked these divers where they took them and been told "in the dive park."

 

[drbill]

But the hypocrisy of some in this thread who hunt at some sites (ones at which I'd like to see more lobsters, not less), but don't want it to happen in others, is pretty laughable. How about starting in with your own behavior before dictating to others where they may be able to hunt (legally).

Hmmm... I guess my aging eyes have missed something or my mind can't quite wrap around this.

I see NO hypocrisy in divers wanting to protect certain areas but take in others. Heck, one of the reasons for establishing marine reserves is so they can help repopulate adjacent unprotected areas for hunters and fishers. Look at the example of how the lobster hunters, who were initially opposed to Dr. Bill Ballantine's reserves in New Zealand, rallied in support of them when they saw how their catches increased because of the "spillover" effect.

I see no reason to consider this laughable at all.

 

[drbill]

I applaud those that hunt but have taken it upon themselves to recognize that taking in this one small area is no challenge, and does, in my opinion more harm than good. They have put what is best for a whole group of people ahead of their own personal wants.

What a concept... and one that we need to recover if this country is going to survive as a leader. Where are te John F. Kennedys now?

Of course keep in perspective the fact that some who believe it is the "right" (legally at least) of others to hunt in the park do not hunt it themselves... but seem to support personal freedom over what is good for the community.

 

[drbill]

You know what will keep lobster everywhere? Not hunting at all. Why don't you get on board with something that would make a real difference, as opposed to championing the cause of keeping around five people a year from hunting in an area of a few hundred square feet.? This is some seriously disingenuous concern for the environment! It's nothing more than a selfish desire for some to be able to see lobsters in one spot, while they snag from another. Yes, that's hyprocrisy.

I would not suggest such a proposal even though I stopped hunting back in 1975. In general I have no problem with those who hunt and follow the rules with exceptions like the dive park (although soon it will be the rule of law there too).

I'm curious as to where you'd come up with a number like "five people a year." I've seen that many bug hunters and more in the park on a single night. Generally they are diving off inflatables that they tie off on the boundary line and descend... often without running lights or dive lights being visible. This is MUCH bigger than a mere five people a year. That is why it is having a pretty obvious impact on the bug population.

 

[drbill]

I love how some think this tiny area is so special (worth making no-take), but then have no problem going a few hundred yards away and taking to their bag limit. Sorry, but how could that be anything other than hypocrisy? Guess what, if you'd stop taking from those spots, they, too, could be special (again).

Hmmm... have to wonder if you've ever taken a course in logic?

I see absolutely nothing hypocritical in this and have bristled at your use of the term... not for myself (since I don't take) but for the opinion that I see nothing wrong with the practice. MANY reserves worldwide allow catch in the adjacent unprotected areas because they are often designated not just to protect that specific area, but to allow increased potential in the adjacent unprotected areas via spillover.

I see marine reserves not simply as a mechanism to protect small local areas, but as one to enhance the unprotected areas around them as well. This is fundamental to the thinking of most marine scientists who work in this area. If you do not see that, then you are missing one of the important points of marine reserve designation in the first place.