A truly profound post (and flame) from news:rec.scuba
\"Greg The Divemaster\" Holt wrote:
> .
> You have quite the opinion for someone who has just listened to "one"
> show.....don't worry your secret is safe with me...;-)
Go away. Quit spamming your show and site.
The website pretty much stinks. Perhaps a few more ads would
liven it up. Do you really think that buying your stupid
clothing is front-page material? That says a lot about you.
Just exactly why do you want to make visitors suffer through
that obnoxious entry page?
Sharks are endangered all over the world. We don't even know which
ones. Some experts fear that many species are "dead men walking".
Feeding creates a killing field for finners.
Finners, who will ride a dive boat to locate the killing field,
optimal bait, times, tides and conditions.
Finners operate out of every port in the world. They ply the
waters of South Florida 24 hours a day. There is nothing you
or anyone else can do about it. If you build it, they will come,
and it will be your fault, because you built it.
Ants in the honey jar are the fault of the fool that took the lid off,
not the ants.
Sharks have a job to do, and eating squidsicles for your profit and
entertainment is not it. Notwithstanding, displaying artificially
congregated sharks in aggressive feeding where they can, and do, harm
each other is hardly a helpful insight to the nature of sharks.
Sharks have been doing what they do for 400,000,000 years. Some,
like the six-gill have been doing it, without change, for over
150,000,000 years. That is not just a measure of how well suited
their adaptation is. It is also a measure of how SUPREMELY VITAL their
particular function is to the ocean system. Mess with them, and you mess
with the whole ocean, if not the planet.
You would have us believe that shark feeding is harmless.
Shortfin Mako
Oceanic White Tip
Blacktip
Lemon
Bull
Reef
Atlantic Sharpnose
Sandbar
Tiger
Scalloped Hammerhead
Bonnethead
Nurse
Silky
Please provide the following information for each above:
Current population (World and SoFla)
Range and distribution
Primary [staple] diet
Subsistence prey quantity in lb./year/lb.
Eating frequency
Kill/Hunt ratio
Life span
Sex ratio
Breeding Frequency and habits
Litter size
Pup Mortality
Age to sexual maturity
Shark species it tolerates
Shark species it cannot tolerate
Shark species it inter-breeds with
Species it depends on for co-dependent prey balance
Species that depend on it for co-dependent prey balance
Communicable disease resistance, vectors, and inter-species tolerances
Resistance and tolerance to human diseases and transmission vectors
Common allergies
Salinity preference and why
Temperature preference and why
Migratory patterns, habits and purpose
Specific natural density for static species, and controlling parameters
Shark-feeding has a potential impact on every question in that
incomplete list. The answer to even one question is not known
for all the species listed. The answers to all the questions are not
known for even one species. A list that is not even comprehensive.
To think that you can put your finger in that soup and twizzle it
around without harm, takes hideously insipient arrogance.
Shark-feeding irrevocably changes the future of every shark there,
and every location in the ocean they would otherwise have been.
The future course of every creature in all those locations is changed
as well. If even one migrating shark stays for the hand outs, the future
of the entire species has been undeniably altered, and with that,
the outcomes of everywhere that species inhabits for all time.
Are you going to tell me that you *know*, for a *fact*, that it's harmless?
Let's not forget the 'blast zone'. What about the place where the
feeding occurs? The local system is demolished. Over predation is
the only possible outcome of regularly attracting too many sharks into
a small range. The divers themselves inflict serious damage even if
they just sit on the sand. Day in, day out silting and disturbance
will make it unsuitable for the many creatures that inhabit it, or
make them vulnerable to predation.
Reduction and consequence, it spreads like a cancer.
How will this[feeding] affect turtle breeding and turtle mortality?
The range from Deerfield to Jupiter is all they have left of the glory
that was once the South Florida Coast. Do they really need to
be hurt anymore than they have already? I cannot say that the
impact is zero, and neither can you. It might be, but you can't
prove it. All you can do is gamble their fate, like you want to
with sharks and every thing else that depends on them.
Divers do not need education about sharks.
Non-divers may, and TLC/TDC/APL/NGC do a fine job without
endangering any sharks. Feeding sharks reaches exactly 0.0%
of the public that needs educating. Training sharks to
associate boat motors with food is stupid, wanton ignorance.
Showing finners how to find trained sharks is the stuff
of talking tree stumps.
You and your sponsors entire platform is a farce to exploit
and endanger sharks without regard for anything but profits,
and recoup bad investments in a stupid idea, one of which
I think, is scubaradio. I don't know anybody that has ever
heard of it. You may be a legend in your own mind. Tell me,
do you come right before, or right after, the Astrological
Stock Market Analysis?
While I don't give a damn about shark bites, I can't help but
notice the dramatic decline in incidents since the shutdown.
Before, I would have dismissed any suggestion that feeding was
contributory, but now I might think it credible. DEMA would
do well to avoid all aspects of that topic in court.
'Feeding the bears' has an illustrious history of disaster. You
go far beyond that. You want to call all the bears down from their
range, away from their territories, gates open, and unguarded. You
can't even be bothered to go see them where they live. Brown bears,
Black bears, Kodiaks, Polar bears, Koalas, Griz and Pandas, all called
down to your snug little valley to compete for food they don't eat.
...just for your amusement and profit.
Oh yes, DEMA's suit will be heard. The State of Florida wishes to
make it crystal clear that outside interference in the management
of state wildlife resources by commercial self-interest groups
will not be suffered. There is a goal here:
Res Adjudicata
Look it up. Dismissal would only establish an avenue for continued
annoyances. There are ground rules for a dismissal that any competent
lawyer can avoid. The lack of dismissal does not lend any credibility
or weight to the plaintiffs case. Only the competence of their lawyers
filings are evaluated.
You evidently do not know this, as you think it a victory.
I assure you the court knows what it means, and has no delusions about
its significance.
A pleasing consequence of this, is that this thing will be done
at maximum expense to the annoying plaintiffs. It is my fervent
wish that FWCC is hiring the most expensive counsel and experts it
can find, and even now considers strategies to raise court costs to
theoretical maximums (like not getting a dismissal). This, to effect
the largest punishment possible on the plaintiffs for bringing this
ridiculous nuisance before the court.
They can't send 'em to jail for being stupid, but boy, they can make it hurt.
Figure it out. Everybody else has.
--
Now be a good little divemaster and fetch me some coffee.
bullshark
Post a follow-up to this message |
