Will Galapagos liveaboard diving become more and more restrictive?

[DazedAndConfuzed]

Hi,

I was thinking of eventually doing a Galapagos liveaboard but heard of the new restrictions such as no land/dive combo and limits on dives and/or Darwin/Wolf. It seems to be alot more restrictive than a few years ago and don't want to do it when I get the least out of it since it is one of those once in a long while trip.

Does anyone foresee the park authorities relaxing their restrictions in the long term or will it get tighter and tighter? Maybe by 2015 or 2016, it will be loosened up?

 

[scubafanatic]

...why would you believe the increasing restrictions will be ever be relaxed ? The authorities there know the wealthy subset of divers who can afford to go there will happily swallow any level of abuse to stand in line to be allowed to dive the 'Mount Everest' of dive locations.

 

[j yaeger]

wow!!!!!!!!!!!
what an ignorant statement!!!
why don't we kill all the baby seals too!!!!

 

[scubafanatic]

wow!!!!!!!!!!!
what an ignorant statement!!!
why don't we kill all the baby seals too!!!!

.....you don't understand that a divers' economic boycott of the Galapagos, to protest the locals increasingly hostile attitude towards the very same divers that bring vital economic support to an otherwise worthless 3rd world country, is the only thing that will get the locals attention and 'relax' their policies? Spend your dive $ in countries/places that still appreciate your business!

...OK, gotta run, I'm testing a batch of baby seal chum this afternoon.

 

[tstormdiver]

Having dove in the Galapagos (liveaboard) a little over a year ago, I understand how restrictive the Ecudorian government is. At times the boat crew almost had to prod us to get ready & to get into the Pangas. When we complained about the rush, we were told that the government strictly regulates when divers can be in the water. If they miss their time slot, then that dive for that day is gone. I can not say that I totally agree with it, but it is their natural resource to do with as they see best. They know what they have & they know it is a treasure, so to protect it & preserve it, I can understand. Whether they are preserving correctly,.... I can not say & it is not my place to say. To change the restrictive policies will take more than affecting the locals. It will take affecting the national government.

 

[scubafanatic]

Having dove in the Galapagos (liveaboard) a little over a year ago, I understand how restrictive the Ecudorian government is. At times the boat crew almost had to prod us to get ready & to get into the Pangas. When we complained about the rush, we were told that the government strictly regulates when divers can be in the water. If they miss their time slot, then that dive for that day is gone. I can not say that I totally agree with it, but it is their natural resource to do with as they see best. They know what they have & they know it is a treasure, so to protect it & preserve it, I can understand. Whether they are preserving correctly,.... I can not say & it is not my place to say. To change the restrictive policies will take more than affecting the locals. It will take affecting the national government.

funny thing is, there's no mention in any of the liveaboards promotional materials mentioning this absurd 'miss your dive time slot, you're screwed?' policy.....Equador would be better served spending it's energy stopping all the illegal shark finning that's rampant in the area. I'm going to cut-and-paste this one paragraph from the latest issue of Undercurrent magazine:

"

The bad news is that there’s no direct way divers can help ensure that Malpelo sharks there remain safe, otherthan to keep putting pressure on the countries that benefit from killing them for their fins. “Massive numbers orsharks are being fished every day in the Golden Triangle of the Galapagos, Malpelo and Cocos islands, with littleor no attention drawn to it,” says Shawn Heinrichs, director of the nonprofit group Shark Savers (​

​

​

​

www.sharksavers.org). “Fisheries and governments adjoining this triangle are profiting from this mass slaughter. Corruptionand greed are at the heart of the issue. Only when this corruption is addressed might we see change. Until then,periodically we will be ‘shocked’ by this sad news, which is really the tip of the iceberg, a passing reflection of​

what happens every day.”

.......sure is a good thing the clueless/corrupt banana republic of Equador is spending it's energy 'policing' the exact moments scuba divers are allowed to splash into the water!

 

[DiveTheGalapagos]

The National Park intends to limit Darwin and Wolf to one day per week at each site IF another liveaboard becomes operational. Currently there are 7 which allows two liveaboards per day at Darwin and Wolf. The more restrictive rules of Feb. 2011 (no visits to land sites accessible by cruise only, limiting the number of dives per day, etc) were implemented with the sustainability of each site in mind. A boycott would be useless in your context because the Park's job is to protect the integrity of Galapagos, not Galapagos tourism. . Best way to do that would be no diving at all. So you would be doing the Park a favor with a boycott while possibly crippling operations that grow increasingly more expensive to operate thus potentially making it impossible for all but a very few to dive Galapagos.

I think the restriction on land visits actually opened up dive sites that no one has dived in years apart from extended itineraries, in essence, the diving just became more interesting. And for those who come to Galapagos for Darwin and Wolf, at least 2 liveaboards still offer 2 days per week at each site. If you are in a remote location, the last thing you want is to have 16 divers dumped on top of 16 divers. The timing of dives at a site is worked out between liveaboards in order to not have too many divers in the water at the same time. It's an informal system that works very well to ensure everyone's experience is the best it can be.

In spite of new restrictions, I'm not hearing anyone say they were anything other than thrilled by the experience. After all, there's only 1 Galapagos and it truly is unique on this planet. If you want to stop finning in these marine reserves, work with Sylvia Earle to raise money to protect them. What Galapagos most needs is the ability to patrol such an enormous area (Boats, operational budget, so obviously zero aerial sweeps). They do rely on GPS required on boats and patrol the waters virtually.

So, if you are diving and do see fishing boats within 1000 meters of Darwin and Wolf, take photos, jot down boat names/numbers and make a report. In my opinion, a bigger problem than corruption in these places (especially Galapagos) is that almost all crew members onboard came from a fishing background themselves and would never ever consider turning anyone in for any infraction. If they weren't fishermen themselves, then most of their family or friends are. In essence, their hands are tied from policing the waters they cruise. Not true for visitors. Most would never take the time to bother though, thus the problem is perpetuated. Illegal boats are seized all the time. And owners never get them back for the most part. That is a financial incentive if it were a bigger risk than it is.

 

[DazedAndConfuzed]

How small could Darwin and Wolf be that divers from different dive groups ends up bumping into each other underwater? Is there only one prime spot to catch these big animals swim by? I didn't think having an abundance of divers in the northern islands would be doing much harm since it seems to be mostly volcanic rocks and big animals swimming by. I would have thought more damage is being done by the 50 or so naturalist cruises that seem to have as much as 100 people on board going onshore to do their land tours.

From what I hear, there is complaint of decreased number of dives. Paying so much for the liveaboard, people are kind of disappointed that they could only do 3 dives a day. Of course they will still go. Even if they offer 5 dives for the whole trip, some people would still go, and the ones who would not go, their spots would end up being taken by the land naturalist who might also want to dive.

It is hypocritical for divers to criticize the finning of sharks just because they enjoy seeing them underwater. Bluefin tuna are almost fished into extinction, but no divers care because nobody ever sees them while diving, so they just remain as another species that disappears out of sight and out of mind.

 

[Shasta_man]

<<It is hypocritical for divers to criticize the finning of sharks just because they enjoy seeing them underwater. Bluefin tuna are almost fished into extinction, but no divers care because nobody ever sees them while diving, so they just remain as another species that disappears out of sight and out of mind.>>

WHAT the heck are you talking about?! That attitude of there is no harm because you aren't educated to see it is the reason why there are these problems. First, the impact from divers is much bigger than whether you are just swimming around in one spot. First there is the big boat you came on and are living on for a week in that area. Second, is that there is way more life on those "barren rocks" than you think. Not everything is a coral garden or immediately apparent to your eyes. Next, your perception of finning criticism is way wrong. We certainly do care about more than just sharks. Divers and others care about the finning because first, they are an apex predator which is essential part of the ecosystem and everything in nature is a balance. You can't just whack a part out with no effect. Without sharks, there a huge effect worldwide. You need to have something that culls the herd and cleans up the ocean. Obvious as the nose on your face. Second, we don't like shark finning because IT IS A HUGE WASTE. They whack the fin off and dump the rest. Total waste. They then do that on an industrial scale, as well as killing many other creatures with their long line fishing with lines miles long, which they also JUST TOSS OVER THE SIDE. Then they go all over the world because they have fished out their own spots. All because some idiot in Asia thinks it will make their pecker start working, which just so we are clear, NO ANIMAL PRODUCT LIKE THIS WILL EVER DO. And lastly, the shark fin tastes like NOTHING! IT's the friggin' broth that makes the taste, so why not put it on something else?! And we certainly do care that tuna are being destroyed as well, as well as other global fish stocks. I think the same thing every time I read about the record price paid in Japan for slicing up another tuna. Sheesh....rant off.

Whether they are doing it right in the Galapagos, I don't know enough about the whole picture to know, but I applaud their efforts to try, because while I would love to be able to dive like in the old days, that can't be sustained. I'd much rather get 3 dives in to see what you see now rather than five dives to see 10 sharks, and then 7, and then 3, and then...

Very educational DiveTheGalapagos, thanks.

<<Prodded to dive>> I'd be waiting for the crew, not vice versa.

 

[baitballer]

If you look at what happened there a few years ago with all liveaboards shut down at a moments notice for what was effectively a shark finning bonanza (There is huge threads here on the board about it) it just goes to show that the government there is much more concerned about the needs of the fishermen that the tourists or the environment.

I am biased I admit since my trip got cancelled at four days notice and between the people in my group we lost over $5000 and our holiday but we all vowed that none of us would go back there unless the government made sweeping changes and actually did something to protect the environment etc. What all these new laws do is anyones guess but I cannot see what impact divers make if they do 3 dives per day or 4. I would have thought the majority of the environmental impact would be having the actual boat travel all the way to Wolf and Darwin. If they banned diving there I could see that having an impact (although that would just mean that the fishermen could strip it bare in a few weeks) but to let diving continue limited to three divers per day makes little sense.

P.S: I live in the Caribbean so no seals to club to death, will a turtle do, lots of them about??!!